State v. Arnold

"To be 'within the immediate view and presence of the court' is to personally witness such conduct." State v. Blackburn, 283 Or App 843, 845, 391, P3d 929 (2017).

Defendant appealed a judgment of summary contempt under ORS 33.096. Defendant assigned error to the trial court’s judgment as the court did not personally observe Defendant’s conduct in court. On appeal, Defendant argued that in accordance with ORS 33.096, the conduct had to have been "within the immediate view and presence of the court" in order to impose the sanction for contempt. In response, the State argued that the Defendant’s argument was unpreserved and further that the alleged error was harmless. "To be 'within the immediate view and presence of the court' is to personally witness such conduct." State v. Blackburn, 283 Or App 843, 845, 391, P3d 929 (2017). The lower court acknowledged it was doubtful of the conduct because the court did not personally witness the Defendant flipping off the camera. Rather, the court asked for the sworn statement of the prosecutor to substitute as its witness. Thus, the Court held that such action does not conform with the requirement of ORS 33.096 to impose a judgment of summary contempt. Reversed and Remanded.