United States v. Hal J. Warlick

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that actions by attorney, committed in the presence of the court, in using jury information that was illegally obtained constituted \an abuse of the functions of his office\
• finding actual obstruction where proceedings were delayed and the judge and court personnel were required to partake in extra work
• defining the term obstruction under 18 U.S.C. § 401(1), which mirrors Code § 18.2-456(1)
• finding “actual obstruction” where, as a result of the contemptuous act, the coui’t and its staff conducted investigation which “took time that would have been used to try eases that were pending and ready for trial”
• misbehavior constitutes an “actual obstruction” where it “interrupt[s] the orderly process of the administration of justice, or thwart[s] the judicial process”
• “[O]bstruction of the administration of justice requires . . . some act that will . . . thwart the judicial process.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).