Chapter 7 Flashcards
6th Amendment
“the right to a speedy and public trial before an impartial jury.
Struggle between 6th and 1st amendment
Following the OJ Case-cts have attempted to control prejudicial publicity and ensure a fair trial.
*Ct conviction rather than ct of public opinion
How does media and court differ in information used?
*The media is not bound by the rules of evidence
*Media may report unsubstantiated details of an arrest or unverified test results.
Criminal OJ Case
*OJ Simpson Pro Football and Hall of Famer was accused of killing his estranged wife and friend.
*Criminally acquitted; Civilly found guilty
*When OJ named person of interest; media went crazy
*Due to media, judge had to disqualify grand jury
Civil OJ case
*Rules of Evidence are different- different standard of proof
*All of evidence excluded from criminal trial was allowed
Michael Jackson case
*Michael Jackson was accused and stood trial for molestation.
*Judge barred cameras from his courtroom & Courthouse and barred attorneys from discussing the case with the media (gag order).
*Judge also sealed the search warrant to search Neverland Ranch and grand jury transcripts.
*Jackson was aquitted
Kobe Bryant case
*Bryant accused of rape
*Victim dropped her claim after her name and details of her sexual history were revealed in violation of Colorado law
*Judge held a closed hearing where her sexual history was discussed, and the clerk accidentally emailed the transcript to the 7 media outlets
*Judge issued an order not publish-prior restraint- ruling that protecting the privacy was the victim was a “state interest of the highest order” and outweighed the media’s right to publish.
Jeffrey Skilling case
*A defendant’s name does not automatically mean the jurors will be biased against him.
*Skillings was the former CEO of Enron; 5th Circuit held that prejudice could arise simply from the fame of the defendant
Irwin v Dowd
*Mr. Irvin was convicted of murdering six people.
*He was originally arrested for burglary and fraud; under pressure to arrest someone for the murders the prosecutor issued a press release calling him “mad dog” and alleging he confessed to the murders.
*The defense was granted a change of venue-did little.
*He was convicted and sentenced to death.
*Jurors claimed they heard about the case but claimed they could be impartial
*The Ct found on appeal he did not receive a fair trial and set aside the verdict
What are the two types of contempt?
*Direct- an act that violates decorum of the ct/shows disrespect for the legal process.
*Indirect (constructive or contempt by publication)- this involves a disrespectful act outside of the courtroom.
Pennekamp v. Florida
*The Ct. overturned two citations criticizing local justices.
*The Miami case involved editorials accusing local judges of being soft on crime; the Corpus case involved criticism of a judge handling a landlord/tenant dispute
*In both cases, the Ct found the citations failed to meet the clear and present danger test
*Now to be cited for indirect contempt-one would have to advocate marching on the courthouse
6 rules for prejudicial publicity from Sheppard case
- Adopt rules to curtail in-court misconduct by reporters;
- Issue protective orders (gag orders);
- Grant a continuance to postpone the trial until community prejudice has had time to subside;
- Grant a change of venue to a place with less prejudicial publicity;
- Admonish the jury to disregard the media publicity; or
- Sequester the jury
What are lawyers prohibited from saying to media in most states?
*Forbidden to make statements that would have a substantial likelihood of prejudicing the case
*Can correct misinformation or falsehood
What right do judges have to talk about when campaigning for office?
*Speak about controversial issues, even if they may have to rule on those issues in the future.
*However, they must avoid the appearance of impropriety or impartiality
Pre-Trial hearing
A check on law enforcement and prosecutors. It is a hearing before the judge to determine whether or not there is enough evidence to support the indictment.
*Not deciding the case- generally the defense does nothing but bring forward a case
*Media could prejudice potential jury pool by covering pre-trial hearing and reporting on a lack of defense raised
Motion hearing
A hearing before a judge who will listening evidence or arguments on whether or not evidence should be allowed in the trial.
*Illegally obtained; or the prejudicial effect will outweigh the probative value
*Again, covering these hearing potential jurors could learn about incriminating evidence that may not be admissible during trial
Gannett v. DePasquale
*The Ct held that the 6th Amendment right to a public trial belongs to the defendant (not the public) and it is a right the defendant may waive.
*The Gannett decision stood as a precedent permitting judges to close a pretrial hearing when they felt the danger of prejudicial publicity would outweigh the public’s right to know.
Richmond Newspapers v. Virginia
*The judge relying on a Virginia statute that allowed “the removal of any person whose presence would impair the conduct of fair trial” closed the entire courtroom.
*The Ct reversed a Virginia SC decision upholding the decision to close the ct room based in large part the Ct holding in Gannett.
*The Ct only invalidated the closing of this particular trial, the Ct recognized for the 1st time that there is a Constitutional right of access to information inherent in the free press guarantees of the 1st Amendment.
Globe Newspapers v Superior Court
*Ct invalidated a Mass law that automatically closed a courtroom whenever a juvenile victim of a sex crime was to testify.
*The Ct held that the judges must evaluate each trial closure on a case-by-case basis rather automatically closing a trial.
The court may close a court room involving a minor rape victim’s testimony when
*There is a “compelling governmental interest” requires closure; and
*That the law requiring closure is “narrowly tailored to serve that interest.
*The justices did say that judges could exclude the press and public in cases where they found the minor’s well-being would be jeopardized if the trial were open.
Did the court hold that the jury selection process in criminal matters must be open to the public?
Yes, in 1984
Again was upheld in Martha Stewart case
Should court documents be open to the public in most cases?
Yes, as per the 1st amendment
The Ct ruled before sealing documents or barring the public from the ct room the judge must determine that
- Allowing the public access would cause a “substantial probability that irreparable damage to the defendant’s fair trial will result;
- There is no alternative way to protect that right (fair trial);and
- There is a “substantial probability” that the secrecy would actually prevent the defendant’s right from being violated.
Phoenix Newspapers v. US District Ct
Access to Sealed records- 9th Circuit has held
*“if a ct contemplates sealing a document or transcript, it must provide sufficient notice to the public and press an afford them and opportunity to object or offer alternatives.”
