| dbo:thumbnail
| |
| dbp:align
| |
| dbp:quote
|
- “[In indirect criminal contempt proceedings] the alleged contemnor must be afforded the same due process protections that are normally provided in criminal proceedings, including notice of the charges, an opportunity to be heard and to present a defense, and counsel.” (en)
- "[W]e must have assurance that those who would wield this power [of prosecution] will be guided solely by their sense of public responsibility for the attainment of justice. A prosecutor of a contempt action who represents the private beneficiary of the court order allegedly violated cannot provide such assurance, for such an attorney is required by the very standards of the profession to serve two masters. The appointment of counsel for [respondents] to conduct the contempt prosecution in these cases therefore was improper." (en)
|
| dbp:source
|
- Young v. United States ex rel. Vuitton et Fils, 481 U.S. 787, 814 . (en)
- In Re: Order Amending Rules 140, 141, and 142 of the Pennsylvania Rules of Criminal Procedure, Docket No. 499 . (en)
|
| dbp:width
| |
| dbp:wikiPageUsesTemplate
| |
| dct:subject
| |
| rdf:type
| |
| rdfs:label
|
- Protection from Abuse order (en)
|
| owl:differentFrom
| |
| prov:wasDerivedFrom
| |
| foaf:depiction
| |
| foaf:isPrimaryTopicOf
| |
| is foaf:primaryTopic
of | |
