EmailEmail
PrintPrint
Contempt upheld for Ohio public defender
Saturday, August 25, 2007
Portage County Municipal Judge John Plough, left, shows public defender Brian Jones, right, the form he could have used to seek a continuance during his contempt hearing yesterday in Kent, Ohio.

KENT, Ohio -- Public defender Brian Jones, who refused to try an assault case because he had only 2 1/2 hours to prepare, now faces a $100 fine and a stain on his record for contempt of court.

Portage County Municipal Judge John Plough last night upheld his own contempt finding against Mr. Jones, saying he showed willful disrespect for the court.

Mr. Jones, a public defender for just four months, walked into Judge Plough's court Aug. 16 and learned he was to defend a 20-year-old man in a misdemeanor assault trial that very day. Mr. Jones asked Judge Plough for a delay. In response, the judge moved back the trial's starting time from 11 a.m. to 1:30 p.m.

As opening statements were to begin, Mr. Jones balked. He said he could not in good conscience try the case because he was unprepared. Judge Plough held him in contempt and ordered sheriff's deputies to remove him from the courtroom.

During a 3 1/2-hour hearing yesterday, Judge Plough vigorously defended himself before he imposed a lecture and token fine on Mr. Jones.

The judge said Mr. Jones failed to file a written motion for a continuance, then frittered away a long lunch hour instead of complying with the court's directive that he interview the three prosecution witnesses who had been subpoenaed for the trial.

Judge Plough also accused Mr. Jones of calling a newspaper reporter to tip him that a confrontation and contempt citation were about to come down.

Ian N. Friedman, Mr. Jones' lawyer, said the judge's account was inaccurate. He said Mr. Jones never called the press. Rather, Mr. Friedman said, the young public defender agonized, then decided he could not adequately defend his client under the rigid schedule the judge imposed.

Mr. Jones refused to go ahead with the trial because that decision was in the best interests of his client, Mr. Friedman said.

Mr. Jones did not testify at yesterday's hearing on the advice of his attorney. The courtroom was filled with about 35 spectators, roughly half of whom were lawyers from the Kent area.

The defendant in the assault case, Jordan Scott, could have gone to jail for six months had he been convicted. His trial has still not been held, as the public defender's staff has filed motions asking that Judge Plough be removed from the case.

Mr. Scott was charged in June, but he neglected to ask for a public defender until mid-August. By then, his case was on the trial docket. Only then did Mr. Jones become his lawyer.

John Wesley Hall, a criminal defense attorney and expert in legal ethics, flew in from Little Rock, Ark., to testify on behalf of Mr. Jones. Mr. Hall said five people were witnesses to the assault Mr. Scott was accused of, and that a good defense attorney would want to talk to them all.

Asked by Mr. Friedman if a lawyer could get ready for such a case in less than a day, Mr. Hall said it would be impossible.

"Nobody could. I couldn't," said Mr. Hall, who has been a lawyer for 34 years.

But Judge Plough was unmoved. He said public defenders often plead their clients guilty only minutes after meeting them. Prosecutors and public defenders, the judge said, regularly have to try cases the day they get the file.

Mr. Jones had only a brief meeting with his client the morning of the trial, a circumstance the judge said put no one at a disadvantage.

"He spent 20 minutes with him, which is probably all the time you're going to spend with a client," Judge Plough said.

Mr. Friedman said the contempt finding and fine will be appealed to Ohio's 11th District Court. Judge Plough stayed the fine, pending the appeal.

Mr. Friedman said he hopes the appeals court will be more inclined than the judge to consider the awful predicament that Mr. Jones was in.

"The idea that a defense lawyer can get prepared in two hours is unthinkable," Mr. Friedman said.

But Judge Plough remained steadfast that the young lawyer should have tried the case as ordered. If his client had been convicted, he could have appealed and claimed he was ineffective counsel because of a judicial order, Judge Plough said.

"I wasn't asking you to do anything unlawful," he told Mr. Jones. "I was asking you to try a case."



First published at PG NOW on August 24, 2007 at 10:51 pm
Milan Simonich can be reached at msimonich@post-gazette.com or 412-263-1956.
Featured Homes
Featured Rentals