Minn. Stat. » CHAPTER 588. CONTEMPTS OF COURT
Minnesota Statutes

Minn. Stat. § 588.03 (2026)

Summary Punishment

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MN-REVrevisor.mn.gov (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

A direct contempt may be punished summarily, for which an order shall be made reciting the facts as occurring in the immediate view and presence of the court or officer, and adjudging the person proceeded against to be guilty of a contempt, and that the person be punished as therein specified.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 13 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1987–2024 · leading case: State v. Tatum, 556 N.W.2d 541 (Minn. 1996).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Tatum, 556 N.W.2d 541 (Minn. 1996). · cites it 7× “§ 588.03. The court may elect to follow the procedures for investigation and hearing in Minn.”
State v. Garcia, 481 N.W.2d 133 (Minn. Ct. App. 1992). · cites it 6× “Next we determine whether the alleged criminal contempt is “direct” criminal contempt or “constructive” criminal contempt.”
In Re Contempt of Armentrout, 480 N.W.2d 685 (Minn. Ct. App. 1992). · cites it 4× “Direct contempt may be punished summarily by issuing an order reciting the facts as occurring in the immediate view and presence of the court or officer, and adjudging the person proceeded against to be guilty of a contempt, and that the person be punished as therein specified.”
State v. Lehman, 749 N.W.2d 76 (Minn. Ct. App. 2008). “§ 588.03 (2006) (“A direct contempt may be punished summarily, for which an order shall be made reciting the facts as occurring in the immediate view and presence of the court or officer, and adjudging the person proceeded against to be guilty of a contempt.”
In Re the Welfare of E.J.B., 466 N.W.2d 768 (Minn. Ct. App. 1991). · cites it 2× “Minn.Stat. § 588.03 (1988). Constructive criminal contempt requires criminal procedural safeguards.”
In re Craig E. Cascarano, State of Minnesota v. Michael Demond Rashaun Mason, 871 N.W.2d 34 (Minn. Ct. App. 2015). · cites it 2× “2d at 545 (citing Minn.Stat. § 588.03). Constructive contempts, on the other hand, are not committed in the immediate presence of the court and may arise- from any of 11 different acts or omissions, including “disobedience of any lawful judgment, order, or process of the court.”
State v. Martin, 555 N.W.2d 899 (Minn. 1996). “In contrast, constructive contempt is “not committed in the immediate presence of the court” and involves misconduct of which the court “has no personal knowledge.”
State v. Whitcomb, 399 N.W.2d 124 (Minn. Ct. App. 1987). · cites it 2× “Minn.Stat. § 588.03 (1984). This power exists independent of statute and is intended to preserve the dignity of the *126 courtroom proceedings.”
State of Minnesota v. Miranda Lynn Jones, 857 N.W.2d 550 (Minn. Ct. App. 2014). · cites it 2× “A court may summarily punish direct contempt, Minn.Stat. § 588.03 (2012), while punishment of constructive contempt requires additional procedural safeguards, see Tatum, 556 N.”
State v. Schloegl, 915 N.W.2d 14 (Minn. Ct. App. 2018). · cites it 2× “" Minn. Stat. § 588.03 (2016). The day after Schloegl's outburst, the district court detailed its reasoning: Mr.”
State of Minnesota v. Blair Benedict Oberton (Minn. 2024). · cites it 2× “Constructive contempt is one that is not committed in the immediate presence of the court, and of which the court has no personal knowledge.”
Lynne A. Torgerson v. State of Minnesota (Minn. Ct. App. 2015). · cites it 2× “While a district court may summarily punish direct contempt, Minn. Stat. § 588.03 (2010), constructive criminal contempt requires criminal procedural safeguards, including the right to receive a written complaint, legal representation, and the right to a jury trial.”
Show all 13 citing cases →
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.