Husband’s contempt conviction upheld, case sent back for re-sentencing
Tennessee case summary on criminal contempt in divorce.
Husband guilty of contempt, but wins another look at sentence
Lisa Ann Welch v. William Mark Welch
The wife in this Shelby County, Tennessee, case was concerned that the husband was using drugs and alcohol around the children, so she petitioned the court for an injunction requiring him to submit to testing. At the hearing, the husband admitted drinking, but denied that it was to an excess.
Initial test results revealed excessive alcohol and opioid use. He was ordered by the court to submit to additional tests including blowing into a cell phone breathalyzer. The wife filed a series petitions for criminal condtempt after the husband failed to comply with the testing. The husband did not respond to these petitions.
After hearing all of the testimony, the trial court found the husband in contempt, based upon his failure to take 125 tests. He was sentenced for 15 consecutive weekends in jail, and the court ordered that he not have any parenting time with his younger child until his sentence was completed. The husband appealed the case to the Tennessee Court of Appeals.
The first argument was that the trial court did not make sufficient factual findings.
But the appeals court quickly dealt with this issue, noting that the findings were sufficient to show the husband’s compliance.
It then looked to the merits of the case, and recited the elements of the offense of contempt. The husband admitted that he violated lawful orders but argued that they were confusing and unclear. A vague or ambiguous order is one that is open to more than one reasonable interpretation. The court’s orally delivered pronouncements may have been confusing but they were reduced to written order, and a written order speaks for a court. The appeals court agreed that the written order was clear, even though it was “inartfully” drafted on one point.
But upon reviewing the evidence, the appeals court agreed with the lower court that it was sufficient to convict on most of the counts.Because some of the counts were reversed, and because the appeals court modified the amount of the fine, it did determine that the husband should be re-sentenced. It therefore remanded the case for resentencing.
