Attorney sanction for broadcasting case upheld
Defense lawyer had associate record court case, show on Facebook
The state Supreme Court has refused to hear the appeal of an attorney who was held in contempt for having an associate surreptitiously film a hearing in Roseville district court and show it on Facebook Live.
Nicholas Somberg, who practices out of Bingham Farms in Oakland County, was cited in April 2017 by Judge Marco Santia in the 39th District Court. The conviction was finalized by Judge Boedeker, who fined him $100.
Somberg was held in contempt for having an associate film a hearing without Judge Santia’s knowledge or approval regard
ing the traffic citation issued to Taylor Trupiano, who was cited for warming up his 1997 Dodge Concorde in the driveway of his Waldorf Street home.
Somberg appealed to Judge Edward Servitto of Macomb County Circuit Court and judges at the state Court of Appeals, all of whom upheld the criminal contempt conviction.
The high court on Wednesday denied Somberg’s “leave to appeal.”
The case received local and national publicity due to the unique nature of the ticket. Several media outlets attended and filmed or photographed the hearing. But the media outlets gained pre-approval from the judge while Somberg did not. He assumed that due to the media coverage, it was OK for him to have it filmed and shown live on Facebook.
But Santia noted each of the media outlets completed a form and turned it in to him before the hearing, as required, and pointed out the TV crews and print media weren’t live broadcasting their recordings.
Somberg also argued to the appeals court he was unaware of the court rule and the filming had no impact on the case, that it did not “alter the status quo of the court room.”
But the appeals court upheld the district and circuit judges.
Santia disbelieved Somberg that he was unaware of the Michigan Supreme Court administrative order that requires prior approval to record proceedings, the appeals judges say in the five-page opinion last Oct. 15.
“After Judge Santia heard appellant’s (Somberg’s) voice and saw his demeanor, the judge determined that appellant’s statements that he did not knowingly violate (the order) were not credible,” the appeals judges wrote.
“Judge Boedeker noted that appellant, as an attorney, was generally aware of the court rules governing his behavior, and so he agreed with Judge Santia’s assessment that appellant’s conduct of violating (the order) was contemptuous,” the judges wrote.
“In light of the fact that appellant is an attorney and as such is generally familiar with the rules governing the courts and Judge Boedeker’s determination that respondent was not credible when he said that he did not knowingly violate (the order), we conclude” Boedeker’s decision “was not clearly erroneous.”
The appeals judges also opined that Somberg’s actions altered the status quo.
“When Judge Santia found out that appellant had already filmed the proceedings without permission, the status quo of Judge Santia’s courtroom was altered,” the judges wrote.
The appeals judges also commented on Judge Servitto’s ruling: “While the circuit court gave appellant’s arguments short shrift, its terse treatment of appellant’s appeal appears to be based on the court’s belief that appellant’s arguments were wholly meritless.”
Meanwhile, Trupiano’s ticket was overturned on appeal in September 2017 by Judge Richard Caretti of Macomb Circuit Court.
The appeals panel consisted of judges Michael F. Gadola, Amy Ronayne Krause and Colleen A. O’Brien.