761
Indirect Criminal ContemptFederal Jurisdiction and
Venue
| |
Although the courts possess an inherent power to enforce obedience
to
their orders so that they may properly perform their functions, Myers v.
United States, 264 U.S. 95, 103 (1924), the federal courts' contempt
power
is limited by 18 U.S.C. § 401 and by Rule 42, Federal Rules of Criminal
Procedure. See United States v. Wilson, 421 U.S. 309, 315 n.
6
(1975); Nye v. United States, 313 U.S. 33, 45 (1941). Accordingly,
all
forms of contempt, whether they be criminal, civil, indirect or direct, must
fall
within one of the three categories of misbehavior described in 18 U.S.C.
§
401. Indirect contempts come within 18 U.S.C. § 401(2) or (3), and the
"so
near thereto clause" of 18 U.S.C. § 401(1). Direct contempts are
confined
to the "in presence" clause of 18 U.S.C. § 401(1).
The court wherein proper venue on federal jurisdiction exists in an
18
U.S.C. § 401 proceeding has been generally agreed to be the court which
rendered the decree and not the court located in the district where the
violation
occurred. See Myers, 264 U.S. at 101; Stiller v.
Hardman,
324 F.2d 626, 628 (2d Cir. 1963).
[cited in USAM 9-39.000] | |