Short answer. Yes. Rule 71 of the Rules of Court expressly lists assuming to be an attorney or officer of a court and acting as such without authority as one of the specific acts a person may be punished for as indirect contempt, and it can only be imposed after a written charge and a hearing.
What the law says
After a charge in writing has been filed, and an opportunity given to the respondent to comment thereon within such period as may be fixed by the court and to be heard by himself or counsel, a person guilty of any of the following acts may be punished for indirect contempt
Rule 71, Section 3 — Indirect contempt to be punished after charge and hearing. Read the full provision →
What the law says
Assuming to be an attorney or an officer of a court, and acting as such without authority
Rule 71, Section 3 — Indirect contempt to be punished after charge and hearing. Read the full provision →
What the law says
nothing in this section shall be so construed as to prevent the court from issuing process to bring the respondent into court, or from holding him in custody pending such proceedings.
Rule 71, Section 3 — Indirect contempt to be punished after charge and hearing. Read the full provision →
The specific act the rule names
Rule 71, Section 3 lists a series of acts that can be punished as indirect contempt, and one of them is written for exactly this situation: assuming to be an attorney or an officer of a court, and acting as such without authority. This covers a person who holds themselves out as a licensed lawyer and appears in that capacity — signing pleadings, arguing before the court, or otherwise acting the part — without actually having the authority to do so.
Where this fits among the other listed grounds
This ground sits alongside other acts the same section punishes as indirect contempt, including disobedience of a lawful court order, misbehavior by a court officer in performing official duties, improper conduct that impedes or degrades the administration of justice, failure to obey a duly served subpoena, and interfering with a court's processes. Assuming the role of an attorney without authority is treated with the same seriousness as these — it is not a minor irregularity but a listed basis for contempt in its own right.
It cannot be punished without a charge and a hearing
Even so, the rule does not allow this to be punished automatically or informally. A charge in writing has to be filed first, and the respondent must be given the opportunity to comment on it within whatever period the court sets, and to be heard, personally or through counsel, before being punished. So while pretending to be a lawyer and appearing in that capacity is squarely covered by the rule, due process still applies — the court has to give the person a real chance to answer before any penalty follows.
What the court can still do in the meantime
The rule also makes clear that none of this stops the court from issuing process to bring the respondent before it, or from holding that person in custody while the contempt proceedings are pending. So even before the charge is fully heard and decided, the court retains the ability to compel the respondent's appearance and, where warranted, to keep them in custody during the process — the written-charge-and-hearing requirement governs the punishment, not the court's ability to secure the person in the meantime.