Increasing defendant's sentence was not acceptable punishment for contempt
In State v. Bodenstedt, issued last month, the S.C. Court of Appeals held that increasing a defendant's sentence by 2 years was not an appropriate punishment for disruptive behavior. Bodenstedt pled guilty to obtaining money by false pretenses, with a recommendation of 1 year followed by probation and restitution. Instead of accepting the recommendation, the plea judge sentenced Bodenstedt to 6 years in prison but stated he would reconsider his sentence if full restitution was made within 10 days.
Following the plea, the judge called Bodenstedt back into the courtroom twice and increased his sentence by one year each time for being disruptive outside of the courtroom, for a total sentence of 8 years in prison. The Court of Appeals held that, although the judge has the power to sentence an individual for contempt of court, the judge does not have the power to increase an individuals sentence which has already been imposed, based on disruptive conduct after the plea. The sentence was reduced again to 6 years.
Contempt of court is a separate crime and, when the contempt is criminal (an unconditional penalty is imposed which cannot be "purged" by the defendant) and constructive (the conduct giving rise to the contempt occurs outside the presence of the court), the defendant is additionally entitled to the assistance of counsel before punishment can be imposed.
