Disruption in the Caurtioom. The Troublesome Defendant

• Pages: 02

Captain Steven F. Lmcaiter

I. Introduction

In deciding how to control an obstreperous defendant, rhe ~ n a l judge must balance rhe interest of s m e t Y ~n the expedtent orderli process ofptice tilth the right ofthe defendant to a fair ~ n a l . ~

In

order lor the trial judge 10 balance these inreierrs. he must be famdiar with xihat constitutes diirupti\e behator: what permmible. constitutional methods ale available to control the behaitor: and what rights of the accused he must consider

This article w11 proiide the mal judge uith an m d ~ m of rhe

inteiesrs he must balance and practical ruggertmnr to a d h m ~n performing this dlfflculr and challengmg rad

11 DISRUPTIOS. \CHAT IS IT?

Most disruption. as dircusced here, rakes place within the confines of the courtroom Hose\er. the accused's conducr before trial or during trial recesses can pia\ ha\oc wirh the normal process of a irial and itill be treated as a form of courtroom disruption.

11 is much easier to point IO certain actmiti and sa\ rhar I[ IS

diirupriie of the criminal process than it is to piecisel\ and formall, define diii u p o n Fea aould dliagree rhar a defendanr xsho refused

IO pur on his clothes. $rho tried to leaie the coumoom, and rho shouted obscenities ahde 111 court did in fact dlirupr hr, m a l ' IC 17

e ~ e n easier to sa\ that disruption has taken place \\hen a defendant

nalkr inside the juri box and ihoier a juror and *hen another defendant m the same [rial hurls a chair at an assistant United Stares 4trarnm Ltke%jie. \.hen the dcfendant rhreatenr the pdge and later rhroni papers on the courrroom floor.' ,\hen a soldier threatens co remme hi, clothes in court if forced IO stand trial ~n a mili~arx uniform I n or itlien the defendant tears an exhibit admitted into e\tdence [o shiedi.L1 the m a l has been diriupted. When a defendant knocks uier n chau and talk5 loudh to rhrjurol-'2 or xihen n defendant "?ea ohscrne \,ordr, refurer to come to court. rrrrhes hlr defense counsel ~n the face during a recess. atrack- rhe proiecuror. and lhrou&li book BI tiis defense miinsel duiing trial.L9

IC 15 also ea51

to dirruprion har taken place

In illinors U. Allen," the leading case in this area, rhe Supreme Courr delineated canstiturionally permissible methods to be used Incontrolling a disruptive defendant. but LI did not specifically define disruption. It did. howerer, describe such conducr ai that which i s "io disorderly, disruptive. and disrespectful of the court that [the] trial cannot be carried on wah [the defendant1 m the murmom "I'

This dercriptmn of a defendant's conduct at least outlmes a general srandard and focuser an behawor whlch pre%ents a tnsl from con-tinuing in an orderh manner 's

In its report on disruption ~n rhe courtroom, the Bar of the City of X w York found no formal definition of disruption It did propose the following as a definirion "[Alny intentmnal conduct by any per-son m the C O U T I ~ O O ~ that substanrially interferes with the dignin, order, and decorum ofjudicial proceedings.'"' This definition, like the phraseology inlliznotr v Alien, placer hear) emphasis on how the particular conduct affects the judicial process.

Ulrimately, the trialjudge must determine what 1s or is not disrup.

tive behavior. This responsibility falls on the trialjudge because it IS

hisjob to control what takes place in the courtroom and to assure the orderly administration of criminal j~scice.'~

Obviously. decisions onuhat constmtes dlsruptite behator will have to be made on a case by case basis because it would be impossible to forecast what a defendant may or ma) not do once he reacher the C O U T I ~ O O ~

In determining whether OT not the behator af the defendant i s disruptive, the trial judge should consider the following qlieitmnr.

1 Is the defendant acting as he LS because of the trial melfor IS he onh upset about one particular aspect of it?''

2 Ir the defendant likely to continue to behabe m the same manner?O

3 Is [he case being tried bv ajudge done orb) ajury?' 4. Does the defendant's behavior place anyone in physical danger or IS his misconduct only verbal?

5 Can the tiial continue or must some action be taken to peimir It

to proceed in an orderl, manner; 6. Is the defendanr capable of controlling his behn\ior7127 How bizarre 1s hrr behaxm;8 Has the defendant acted the Eame ua) preiiou~ii?~9 Ir the defendant representingThe ansl(ers to these qucrtions wd1 aid the Judge m deciding \+herher or nor the conducr of the defendant is disrupti\e.

It is imporrant that the judge himself thoroughh analvie the defendant'

111. THE JUDGE'S ROLE

A RESPO.!'SIBlLITY FOR CO.YTROLLI.YG CO.\DL-CT I.\- THE COLRTROOC1

The respaniibiiin of the mal Judge for conrrolling whar takes place in rhe courtroom has been CXDIICIIIIrecognized b, rhe Ameri-

can Bar Ariociarmn.

~n P digmfied. militan manner He IS responsible for she fair and orderli conducr of the pmieedingr ~n accordance Klrh IPU pa

In deciding xhat action is needed to maintain order and to control the disruptwe defendant. the judge must rely on his own discre-tmn.2' Although a judge mag need to know about the defendant's activities which have taken place outside of his presence in order to make a sound deciiion ai to what action to take, the final decision is his alone. For him to rely entirely an another's judgment would he reversible

B BALANCLVG THE RIGHTS OF THE ACCUSED ASD THE ZXTEREST OF SOCIETY

In making his decision as IO what action to take, the judge must delicareli halance the rights of the accused with the inrerest of EOCL-et\ tn the expedient, orderlv process afjustice.20 This 1s not an ear) task, nor one h,hich should he approached with less than mai auareneis of the interests involved. The merhodr available to control the disrupthe defendant, by their $cry naiure. canflicr with some of the basic rights our criminaljustice sstem pro\ides for the accused

The judge should ~nit~allsebaluate the situation and derermine

whether the behaiior of the defendant 3s of a violent or nonviolent character Violent behaiior must be dealr with firmly and ex-peditiously to aroid harm LO all those present, including the ac-cused." The nalure of Yiolent conduct itself limits the alternatives arailable to the judge Conaerselg, when he IS dealing rirh nonvio-lent heharior such ai verbal outbursts. the judge has more tme to decide ahich of a broader group of actions is appr~priate.'~

Once he has determined the character of the dtsruptmn. thejudge should attempt 10 tdentifi. the reason for the dwuptmn as a firit step in determining hax to handle it 34 If the conduct is extreme and hizarre and iuggerri that the accused ma) not be mentally compe-rent to stand trial, thejudge should considex recessing the trial and ordering a psychiatric eialuation of rhe accusdgS L o o k q for the cause of the conduct is an aid in determining how to handle It. Aside from those cases *here the accused appears to he mentall) mcompe-tent. the methods alailable IO con[rol dtsruprire conduct are rhe same uherher the conduct is rhe result of meanness. political phihiophi. alcohol drugs, OT a character and behailor disoider

Thejudge should also consider irhether the conduct *ith rhich he is confronted is an isolated incidenr or parr of P course of conduct calculated to disrupt the proceedings s6 A minor disruption of a noniiolenr charactel. such as a single profane word or gestuie map prompt the judge to dela, taking action against the defendant and ran to see If he periiirs m such conduct On the other hand. a judge can warn the defendanr concerning his conduct at the time it takes place, with the hope that such a varning will inhibir an) future miiconduct Such a uarning is more appropriate If It IS clear that the conduct of rhe defendanr iias nothing more than an emotional outburst If the disruption is. or appears IO he, an ob\mua attempt to dirrupr the proceedings, rhejudge must acrqutckl5 and faicefullr to quash such c~nduct.~'

If the disruption 1s non\mlenr, a h ~ n a

warn-

trig should be *"en to the defendanr ourlmng uhar u.111 happen If he coniinuei 10 he disruptlie If I[ IS a iioleni disiuption rhe judge ma\ be iequired IO use more aggreriire measures such as binding the defendant or remmmg him fiom the ~oiiitroom because the Interest of ,ociet> in the orderl,, timel, process ofjustice outweighs the defendant's righrr IO he free of shacklea and present at trial

If rhr defendant IS acting as his 0%" counsel. rhe judge should rake lnro account all the factors dercrlhed aboie and additionall\ consider ).herher the defendants conduct ii the resul~ of d good

faith effort to pursue a legai question.39 While the facr that a deiendant 1s representing himself gi\es him no righr to act contrary to the behavior expected of all criminal deiendanrs, a judge should be prepared to separate the conduct of the defendant as a defendant, and the conduct of the defendant as counse! pursuing whar he be-lieves to he a valid legal I S S U ~ . ' ~

3. AFFIRMATIVE STEPS TO AVOID DISRL'PTI05

To aroid the type of disruptiw behavior described above, It is recommended that, at the beginning of rhe trial, the judge...