Pennsylvania Court Voids Insult Contempt

Direct criminal contempt that ends in jail requires a real obstruction, not a vulgar line and a pause long enough for the judge to ask what was said. The Supreme Court held this was a momentary break and vacated the conviction. Outlaw had already served the 15-to-30-day term.

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court on Oct. 29 reversed Basile Outlaw's conviction for direct criminal contempt and vacated his sentence of 15 to 30 days in jail.

In June 2022, Outlaw was sitting in the gallery while Philadelphia Judge Roxanne Covington ruled on a suppression motion in another man's case. He stood up, directed a vulgar insult at her, and started to leave. She stopped and asked what he had said. He said he was leaving. He came back to the courtroom on his own and was taken into custody. He did not dispute the facts. He told the judge he had returned to apologize. She sentenced him to 15 to 30 days. He asked for parole after the minimum. The court never ruled on that request, and he served the full term.

The Philadelphia District Attorney's Office told the Superior Court that the outburst was unacceptable and still was not an obstruction, so the evidence did not support the conviction. The Superior Court affirmed anyway. The Supreme Court reversed. Under the statute, contempt in the court's presence requires a significant disruption of the proceeding. A momentary interruption does not qualify. The conviction is undone, and the sentence is vacated.