Editing Summary offence (section)

== United States ==
In United States [[law of the United States|federal]] and [[State_law_(United_States)|state law]], "there are certain minor or petty offenses that may be proceeded against summarily, and without a jury".<ref>{{Cite web |url=https://cite.case.law/us/127/540/#p552 |title=Callan v. Wilson, 127 U.S. 540 (1888) |page=552 |date=May 14, 1888 |work=U.S. Supreme Court |publisher=Harvard Law School}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |url=https://cite.case.law/us/391/145/#p146 |title=Duncan v. Louisiana, 391 U.S. 145 (1968) |page=146 |date=May 20, 1968 |work=U.S. Supreme Court |publisher=Harvard Law School}}</ref><ref name="Alabama v. Shelton">{{Cite web |url=https://cite.case.law/us/535/654/#footnote_1_10 |title=Alabama v. Shelton, 535 U.S. 654 (2002) |page=670 n.&nbsp;10 |date=May 20, 2002 |work=U.S. Supreme Court |publisher=Harvard Law School |quote=In [[Pennsylvania]], for example, all [[defendant]]s charged with [[misdemeanor]]s enjoy a right to counsel regardless of the sentence imposed, '''''only those charged with 'summary offenses' (violations not technically considered crimes and punishable by no more than 90 days' imprisonment''''',&nbsp;... may receive a suspended sentence uncounseled. (Typical 'summary offenses' in Pennsylvania include the failure to return a library book within 30 days... and fishing on a Sunday&nbsp;...}} (citations omitted) (emphasis added).</ref> These can include criminal and civil citations, where a person may be charged with a criminal or non-criminal infraction without the need of a physical arrest, such as in cases of non-violent fineable violations, crimes that carry little incarceration time, or non-criminal acts such as speeding.<ref>{{Cite web |url=https://cite.case.law/us/535/654/#footnote_1_10 |title=Alabama v. Shelton, 535 U.S. 654 (2002) |page=670 n.&nbsp;10 |date=May 20, 2002 |work=U.S. Supreme Court |publisher=Harvard Law School |quote=In [[Pennsylvania]], for example, all [[defendant]]s charged with [[misdemeanor]]s enjoy a right to counsel regardless of the sentence imposed, only those charged with 'summary offenses' (violations not technically considered crimes and punishable by no more than 90 days' imprisonment,&nbsp;... may receive a suspended sentence uncounseled. (Typical 'summary offenses' in Pennsylvania include the failure to return a library book within 30 days... and fishing on a Sunday&nbsp;...}} (citations omitted).</ref>  Any crime that is punishable by the controlling law for more than six months of [[imprisonment]] must have some means for a jury trial.<ref name="petty offense">{{USC|18|19}} ("Petty offense defined"); {{Cite web |url=https://cite.case.law/us/518/322/#p323 |title=Lewis v. United States, 518 U.S. 322 (1996) |page=323 |date=June 24, 1996 |work=U.S. Supreme Court |publisher=Harvard Law School}}</ref> Some states, such as [[California]], provide that all [[defendant]]s are entitled to a jury trial (irrespective of the nature of their offenses).<ref>{{Cite web |url=https://cite.case.law/cal/106/296/#p297 |title=Ex parte Wong You Ting, 106 Cal. 296 (1895) |page=297 |date=March 9, 1895 |work=Supreme Court of California |publisher=Harvard Law School}}</ref> In any case, for summary criminal offenses in the United States, convictions can still show as such on a criminal record.<ref>{{Cite web |url=https://cite.case.law/f3d/386/1022/#p1025 |title=Adefemi v. Ashcroft, 386 F.3d 1022 |page=1025 |date=September 28, 2004 |work=U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit |publisher=Harvard Law School |quote=During a hearing on remand, Adefemi acknowledged several other convictions and arrests, including the circumstances surrounding Georgia Citation Number 0129, under which Adefemi received a citation for a weapons violation.}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |url=https://cite.case.law/f3d/494/723/#p724 |title=Awad v. Gonzales, 494 F.3d 723 |page=724 & n.&nbsp;2 |date=July 20, 2007 |work=U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit |publisher=Harvard Law School}}</ref>

[[Contempt of court]] is considered a [[prerogative]] of the court, as "the requirement of a jury does not apply to contempts committed in disobedience of any lawful writ, process, order, rule, decree, or command entered in any suit or action brought or prosecuted in the name of, or on behalf of, the United States".<ref>{{Cite web |url=https://cite.case.law/us/376/681/#p688 |title=United States v. Barnett, 376 U.S. 681 (1964) |page=688 |date=April 6, 1964 |work=U.S. Supreme Court |publisher=Harvard Law School}} (quotation marks omitted)</ref> There have been criticisms over the practice. In particular, [[Supreme Court of the United States|Supreme Court]] Justice [[Hugo Black]] wrote in a 1964 dissent: "It is high time, in my judgment, to wipe out root and branch the judge-invented and judge-maintained notion that judges can try criminal contempt cases without a jury."<ref>{{Cite web |url=https://cite.case.law/us/376/681/#p727 |title=United States v. Barnett, 376 U.S. 681 (1964) |page=727 |date=April 6, 1964 |work=U.S. Supreme Court |publisher=Harvard Law School |editor=[[Hugo Black|Justice Black]], dissenting}}</ref>