State v. Baker

How courts have described this case

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

• the power to punish a direct contempt summarily is inherent in all courts and arises from the necessity of preserving order in judicial proceedings
• defendant who berated judge who was signing papers in his office-could not be summarily held in contempt
• the legislative history of ORS 33.096 “demonstrates that the tradi- tional distinctions [between direct and indirect contempt] were to be continued”
• “[T]he revisions to the contempt statutes do not overrule earlier law
• explaining the rationale behind summary contempt proceedings under ORS 33.096

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

6 cases in this archive cite this case.

• State v. Spainhower
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2012-07-05· cited 19×
• Frost v. Lotspeich
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2001-07-05· cited 8×
• State v. Pearson
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 1995-08-02· cited 7×
• State v. Ferguson
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2001-03-14· cited 6×
• State v. Arnold
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2020-03-11· cited 5×
• Lindsey v. Merzenich
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 1994-09-07

Cites

2 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• City of Klamath Falls v. Bailey
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 1979-11-26· cited 10×
• Rust v. Pratt
  Supreme Court· 1938-02-28· cited 7×