Scott Millard spent an afternoon in the Ottawa County jail last Friday for contempt of court after counseling his client, who was being arraigned in the Hudsonville 58th District Court before Judge Ken Post, not to answer the judge's questions about prior use of controlled substances. According to the Holland Sentinel, the arraignment for his client has been postponed pending Millard's appeal of the contempt charge. Millard's attorney (and law firm colleague) said he plans to file a notice asking the Ottawa County Circuit Court to reexamine the way minor in possession cases are handled at the district court level.
Update: ABA Journal has a new post with excerpts from the transcript of the arraignment:
Although the judge said he wasn't seeking the information to charge Millard's client with a crime, only to set bond, Millard apparently felt (he wasn't allowed to explain his reasoning to the court in full) that it still wouldn't be in the client's interest to answer the judge's questions and provide such information.
Later on, the following exchange took place, as Millard tried to rely on the Fifth Amendment to shield his client from the judge's questions:
JUDGE: "I'm not interested in what you think. Haven't you gotten that yet?"
MILLARD: "I have gotten that, and I...understand that, and your honor, the court fully, certainly has the right to not care what I say. How—"
JUDGE: "Thank you. Then be quiet."
Going on to speak directly to Millard's client, the judge then says: "When was the last time that you, the date that you last used controlled substances, sir?" Millard interrupts to prevent his client from answering, which sets off further fireworks:
JUDGE: "One more word, and I'm going to hold you in contempt."
As Millard continues to represent his client, the judge cites him for contempt and fines him $100. Then, a short time later, he lowers the boom:
JUDGE: "Counsel, I'm holding you in contempt of court. Remand him to the jail."
HT: ABA Journal