Skip to main content
Federal & State Lawfederalstatelaw.com
Home/Federal/Cases
Ohio Court of Appeals· 11/5/2020

Cleveland v. Bright

Citations

  • 162 N.E.3d 153
  • 2020 Ohio 5180

Syllabus

Contempt of court civil and criminal contempt direct and indirect contempt community control sanctions inherent authority R.C. 2705.05(A). The court erred as a matter of law when it sentenced the contemnor to community control sanctions for contempt. Although the sanctions identified in R.C. 2705.05(A) do not limit a court's inherent authority to punish contemptuous conduct, this inherent authority does not include the power to impose community control sanctions.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • “The primary purpose of criminal contempt is to ‘punish the contemnor’ and ‘to vindicate the court.’ The focus of probation is rehabilitation as opposed to punishment.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Per Curiam

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

18 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

38 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.