◆ SpookStack

“a. 606—OPINION a WAINNATIS . ATTEN re) ALLANULS U. ALBELN Wiinois court faced in this case. And eriminal contempt has obvious limitations as a sanction when the defendant is charged with a crime so serious that a very severe sentence such as death or iife imprisonment is likely to be imposed. In such a case the defendant might not be affected by a mere contempt sentence when he ulti- mately faces a far inore serious sanction. Nevertheless, the contempt remedy should be borne in mind by a judge in the circumstances of this case. Another aspect of the contempt remedy is the judge’s nower, when exercised consistently with state and fed- eral law, to imprison an unruly defendant such as Allen for civil contempt and discontinue the trial until such time as the defendant promises to behave himself. This procedure is consistent with the defendant’s right to be present at trial, and yet it avoids the serious short- comings of the use of shackles and gags. It must be recognized, however, that a defendant might conceiv- ably, as a matter of calculated strategy, elect to spend a prolonged period in confinement for contempt in the hope that adverse witnesses might be unavailable after a lapse of time. <A court must guard ‘against allowing a defendant to profit from his own wrong in this way. III The trial court in this case decided under the cir- cumstances to remove the defendant from the court- room and to continue his trial in his absence until and unless he promised to conduct himself in a manner befitting an American courtroom, As we said carlier, we find nothing unconstitutional about this procedure. Allen’s behavior was clearly of such an extreme and aggravated nature as to justify either his removal from the courtroom or his total physical restraint. Prior to his removal he was repeatedly warned by thie trial judge * ‘