SECOND DI VI SI ON

M I LLER, P. J.

, RI C K M A N and REESE, JJ.

N O T IC E : M otions for r e c ons i de r a tion m us t be ph y sic a l ly r e ce iv ed i n our c le r k ’s offic e w ithin te n da y s of the da te of de c is ion to be de e m ed tim e ly file d.

http://w w w .ga a ppe a l s .us /r ule s

Januar y 21, 2020



# I n th e Co u r t o f

A p p eals o f

G eo r g ia

A1 9 A1 70 6 . SPIKES v

. THE STATE.

M I LLE R , Pres i d i n g J u d g e.

C h a r l es Jam es Sp i k es ap p eal s fro m h i s co n vi ct io n s fo r rap e an d ch i l d

m o les t at i o n , arg u i n g t h at t h e t ri al co u rt erred d uri n g t ri al wh en i t co m p l et el y cl o s ed

t h e co urt ro o m d uri ng th e v i ct i m ’ s t es t i m o n y wi t h o u t fi rs t en g ag i n g i n an an al y s i s

u n d er t h e Su p rem e Co u rt o f th e Un i t e d S t a t e s ’ deci s i o n in W a l l er v. Geo r

g i a , 4 6 7

U. S. 3 9 (1 0 4 SCt 2 2 1 0, 8 1 LEd 2 d 3 1 ) (1 9 8 4 ). W e d et erm i n e t h at a W a ll er an al y s i s

was neces sary i n t h i s cas e b ecau s e t h e t r i al co u rt d e fact o co m p l et el y cl o s ed t h e

co u rt ro o m an d th at t h e t ri al co u rt co m m i t ted rev ers ib l e e r r o r wh en i t cl o s ed t h e

co u rt ro o m wi t ho u t m ak i n g ad eq u at e fi n d i n g s t o s u p p ort t h e cl os u re. Th erefo re, we

m u st rev ers e Sp i k es ’ co n v i ct i o n s an d rem an d fo r a n ew t ri al

.Vi ewed i n t h e l i gh t m o st fav o rab l e t o t he ju ry ’ s v erd ict s , 1 t h e ev id en ce s h o wed

t h at Sp i k es an d t h e t h en th i rt een -y e a r

- o l d vi ct i m an d her fam i l y were Sp i k es ’

d o wn s t ai rs n ei g h b o rs

. On e ev en i n g , t h ere was a g at h eri n g o f ad ul t s an d t een ag ers at

Sp i k es ’ ap art m en t

, at wh i ch t h e v i c t i m was pres en t

. At on e p o i n t

, Sp i kes an d t h e

v i ct i m were i n th e l i vi n g ro o m wat ch i ng a m ov i e t o g et h er. On ce t h e t wo of t h em were

al o n e, Sp i k es grab b ed t h e v ict i m b y t h e arm , t o o k h er i n t o th e b at h ro o m , l o ck ed t h e

d o o r, an d t u rn ed t h e l i g h t s o ff. Sp i k es t h en m ad e t h e v i ct i m s u ck h is p en i s an d h ad

v ag in al s ex wi t h h er

— b o t h o f wh ich were ag ai n s t h er wi l l

— an d al so ejacu l at ed o n

t h e v i ct i m ’ s b ack

.

Th e St at e i n d i ct ed Sp i k es fo r o n e co un t of ag g rav at ed s o d o m y (OCGA § 1 6 -6

-

2 (a) ( 2 )), o n e co u n t o f rap e (OCGA § 1 6 -6 -1 ), fo u r co u n t s o f ch i l d m o l es t at i o n

(OCGA § 1 6 -6 -4 (a)), an d on e co u nt o f fal s e i m p ri s o nm en t (OCGA § 1 6 -5 -4 1 ). Th e

ju ry co n v i ct ed Sp i k es o f rap e an d t wo o f t h e ch i ld m o l es t at i on co u n t s an d acq u i t t ed

h i m o f th e rem ai n i n g co u n t s o f t h e i n d ict m en t

, an d t h e t ri al co urt s en t en ced Sp i k es

t o l i fe i m p ri s o n m en t wi t h ou t t h e p o s s i b i l i t y o f p aro l e. Sp i kes th en fi l ed a d i rect

ap p eal

.

1 Ja cks o n v. Vi r

gi n i a , 4 4 3 U. S. 3 07 (9 9 SCt 2 7 8 1 , 6 1 LE2 d 5 6 0 ) (1 9 7 9 ).

2On ap p eal

, Sp i k e s ’ s o l e c l ai m o f erro r i s t h at t h e tri al co u rt erred wh en i t

co m p l et el y cl o s ed t h e co urt ro o m d u ri n g t h e v i ct i m ’ s tes t i m on y wi t h o ut fi rs t en g ag i n g

i n t h e an al y si s ex p li cat ed i n W a l l er , s u pra, an d t h at t h e t ri al co u rt ’s f a i l u r e i n t h i s

reg ard n eces s i tat es a n ew t ri al

. W e ag ree.

(a ) Th e r i g h t t o a p u b l i c t r i a l

.

Th e Si x t h Am en d m en t to t h e U n i t ed St at es Co n s t it u t i o n , ap p l i cab l e t o t h e

s t at es i n rel ev an t p art

, p ro v i d es t h at “ [i ] n al l cri m i n al p ro s ecu t i o ns , t h e accu s ed s h al l

en jo y t h e ri g h t t o a s p eed y an d p u b l i c t ri al

, b y an i m part i al ju ry [.] ” U. S. Co ns t

.

Am en d

. VI. Th e Geo rg i a Co n s t i t u t i o n al s o g u aran tees cri m i n al defen d an t s t h e ri g ht

t o a p u b li c t ri al

. G a. Co n s t. o f 19 8 3

, A rt

. I, Sec. I, Par. XI. Im po rt an tl y , “ G eo rg i a l aw

reg ard i n g t h e p u b l i c as p ect o f h ea r i n gs i n cri m i n al cas es is m o re p ro t ect i v e o f t h e

co n cep t o f o p en co urt ro o m s t h an fed eral l aw. O ur s t at e co n s ti tu t io n p o i n t -b l an k l y

s t at es th at cri m i n al t ri al s s ha l l b e p u b l i c.” (Ci t at i o n an d p u n ct uat i o n o m i t t ed ;

em ph as i s i n ori gi nal .) Pu rvi s v. S t a te

, 2 8 8 Ga. 8 65

, 8 6 6 (1 ) (7 0 8 SE2 d 2 8 3 ) (2 0 1 1 ).

Al t h o u g h a d efen d an t ’ s ri g h t t o a pu b l ic t ri al i s n o t u n l i m i t ed

, “ [t ] h e ci rcu m s t an ces

i n wh i ch a d efen d an t ’s S i x t h Am en d m en t ri g h t m ay be l i m i t ed are rare an d t h e

b al an ce o f i n t eres t s m

u st b e s tru ck wi t h s p eci al care.” (Ci t at i o ns an d pu n ct u at i o n

o m it t ed .) Ja cks o n v. S ta t e , 3 3 9 Ga. Ap p . 3 1 3 , 3 1 8 (2 ) (b ) (7 9 3 SE2 d 2 0 1 ) (2 0 1 6 ).

3Befo re t he t ri al co urt can ex cl u d e th e pu b li c fro m a n y s t a g e o f a cri m i nal

t ri al

, t he part y s eek i n g t o cl o s e t h e heari ng m u s t ad v an ce an o v erri d i n g

i n t eres t t h at i s l i k el y t o b e p rej u d i c e d

, t h e cl o s u re m u s t b e n o bro ad er

t h an n eces s ary t o p ro t ect t h at i n t eres t

, t h e t ri al co u rt m u s t co n s i d e r

reas o n ab l e a l t ern at i v es t o cl o s in g t h e pro ceed i n g, an d i t m u s t m ak e

fi nd in g s ad eq u at e t o s u p p o rt t h e cl o s ure.

(Pu n ct u at i on o m i t t ed ; e m p h a s i s s u p p l i ed

. ) Ja cks o n , s u p ra, 3 3 9 Ga. A pp

. at 3 1 8 (2 )

(b ) (ci t i n g Pr es l ey v. Geo r g i a , 5 5 8 U. S. 20 9

, 2 1 4 ( 1 3 0 S C t 7 2 1

, 1 75 LEd 2 d 6 7 5 )

(2 0 1 0)). W e rev iew t h e t ri al co u rt ’ s cl o s u re o f a co u rt ro o m fo r an ab u s e o f d i s cret i o n.

Mu l li s v. S ta t e , 2 9 2 Ga. Ap p

. 2 1 8

, 2 2 1 ( 6 ) (6 6 4 SE2 d 2 7 1 ) (2 0 0 8 ). M i n d fu l o f t h i s

fram ewo rk , we n o w t u rn t o wh et h er t h e t ri al co u rt co m m i t t ed rev ers i b l e erro r.

(b ) Th e co u r t r o o m cl o s u r e wa s ef f ect i vel y a t o t al cl o s u r e

.

Gen eral ly

, w e h av e ch aract eri zed co u rt ro o m cl o s u res as ei th er to tal o r p art i al

.

See Ja cks o n , s u p ra, 3 39 Ga. Ap p

. at 3 1 6 (2 ) (a); Hu n t v. S t a t e , 2 6 8 Ga. Ap p

. 5 6 8

, 5 7 1

(1 ) (6 0 2 SE2 d 3 1 2 ) (2 0 04 ). “ A p art i al cl o s u r e o ccu rs wh en s o m e m em b ers o f t h e

p u b l i c are p erm it t ed t o at t en d

, wh i l e a t o t al co u rt ro o m cl o s u re i n vo l v es ex cl u s i o n o f

al l m em b ers o f t h e pu b l i c.” Ja cks o n , s u p ra, 3 39 Ga. A p p

. at 3 1 6 (2 ) (a). In Ja cks o n ,

we reco g n i zed t h at

, wh i l e t h e St at e h a s a co m p el li ng i n t eres t i n pro t ect i n g m i n o r

v i ct i m s o f s ex cri m es , a t ri al co u rt m u st co n d u ct th e W

a l l er an al y s i s b efo re o rd eri n g

4a t o t al cl o s u re of th e co urt ro o m t o c o m p l y w i t h Un it ed St at es Su p rem e Co u rt

p reced en t

. Id

. at 3 1 8 -3 2 0 (2 ) (b ). See Gl ob e N e w s p a p er Co

. v. Su

p er i o r Co u r t f

o r

No r f ol k Co u n ty

, 4 5 7 U. S. 5 9 6

, 6 0 7 -6 0 9 (B) (IV) (1 0 2 SCt 2 61 3

, 7 3 LEd 2 d 2 4 8 )

(1 9 8 2) (ex p l ai n i n g t h at

, al t h o ug h t h e St at e has a co m p el l in g i n t eres t i n safeg u ard i n g

t h e ph y s i cal an d ps y ch o l o gi cal wel l -b ei n g o f a m i n o r v i ct i m , t h e t r i al co u rt can

d et erm i n e o n a cas e-b y -cas e b as i s wh et h er cl o s ure i s n eces s ary b y co n si d eri n g t h e

m i n o r v i ct i m ’ s ag e, ps y ch o l o gi cal m at u ri ty an d u nd ers t an d i ng , t he n at ure o f t h e

cri m e, t h e d es i res o f t h e v i ct i m , an d t h e i nt eres t s o f p aren t s an d rel at i v es ).

In t h i s cas e, aft er t h e St at e an n o un ced t h e v i ct i m as i t s fi rs t wi t n es s , t h e

p ro s ecu to r “ as k [ed ] th at t h e co u rt ro o m be cl eared o f an y b o d y ” an d o n l y req u e s t e d

t h at t h e v i ct i m ’ s m o t h er b e al l owed t o rem ai n

. Sp i k es ’ co u n s el o b ject ed

, ex p l ai n i n g

t h at Sp ik es ’ fam i l y was p res en t an d wi sh ed t o li s ten t o t h e en t i re p ro ceed i ng

. Th e t ri al

co u rt t hen s t at ed

,

I feel th at t h e s t at u t e req ui res t h at I cl o s e t h e co u rt ro o m ex cep t fo r n o n

es s en t i al p ers o n n el

. So t h at m ean s t h e co u rt rep o rt er m ay rem a i n , th e

b ai l i ff, co u rt s ecu ri ty

, cl erk

, p ro secu t o r, cl i en t an d m o t h er

. So fri en d s

an d fam i l y m em

b ers , y o u k n o w , w e h a v e o p en co u rt ro o m s b u t I’ m

req u ired t o fo ll o w t h e s t at u t e t o p ro tect t h e m i n o r ch i l d ’ s p ri v acy

.

5Sp i k es ren ewed hi s o b ject i o n , arg u i n g t h at h e was en t it l ed t o an o p en t ri al an d

ex p lai n i n g t h at t he cl o s u re, es peci al l y as ap p l i ed to h i s fam i l y , wo u l d vi o l at e h i s Si x th

Am en d m en t ri g h t s an d h i s s t at e co n st i t u t io n al ri gh t s

. Th e t ri al co u rt p ro ceed ed wi th

t h e co u rt ro o m cl o s u re as i t h ad p rev i o u s l y d i rect ed an d reo pen ed t h e co u rt ro o m aft er

v i ct i m t es t i fi ed

.

Un q ues ti o n ab l y , t h e t ri al co u rt d i d no t en g ag e i n a W al ler an al y s i s b efo re

cl o s i ng t h e co u rt r o o m , a n d n ei t h er t h e St at e n o r th e t ri al co u rt i n v ok ed a s p eci fi c

s t a t u t e b efo re t h e cl o s u re. Nev ert h el es s , t h e St at e arg u es t h at th e t ri al co u rt o n l y

p art i al l y cl o sed t h e co u rt ro o m p u rs u an t t o t h e m an d at o ry cl o s u re ru l e en cap s u l at ed

i n O C GA § 17 -8 -5 4 an d t h at t h e l eg i s l at u re d oes n o t req ui re t ri al co u rt s t o m a k e

W a l ler fi n d i n g s on t h e reco rd wh en act in g i n acco rd an ce wi t h OCGA § 1 7 -8 -5 4

. To

t h e ex t en t t h at a q u es t i on rem ai n s reg ard i n g wh et h er a t ri al co u rt m u s t fi rs t en g ag e in

a W al l er an al y s i s b efo re effect i n g a p art i al cl o s u re u n d er OCGA § 1 7 -8 -5 4

, 2 we n eed

n o t d eci d e t h at i s s u e t o d ay

. Th is i s b ecau se t h e cl o s ure of th e co urt ro om was n o t

, in

act u al i t y , a p art i al cl o s u re i n acco rd an ce wi t h OCGA § 1 7-8 -5 4

.

2 See, e.g ., S

co t t v. S t a t e , 3 0 6 Ga. 5 0 7

, 5 1 0-5 1 6 (8 3 2 SE2 d 4 26 ) (2 0 1 9 ) (Pet ers on , J ., co ncu rri ng ).

6“ OCGA § 1 7 -8 -5 4 p ro v id es fo r o n l y a part i al cl o s u re o f a cri m in al t ri al b as ed

u p o n a leg i sl at i v e d et erm i nat i o n t h at t h ere i s a co m p el l i n g s t at e i n teres t i n p ro t ect i n g

ch i l d ren w h i l e th ey are t e s t i f yi n g co n cern i n g a sex o ffen s e.” Hu n t

, s u p ra, 2 6 8 Ga.

Ap p . at 5 7 1 (1 ). Th e s tat u t e read s as fo l l ows :

[i ] n t h e tri al o f an y cri m i n al cas e, wh en an y p ers o n u n d er t h e ag e o f 1 6

i s t es t i fy i n g co n cern i n g an y s ex ua l o f f e n s e, t h e co u rt s h al l cl ear th e

co u rt ro om o f al l p ers o n s ex cep t p art i es t o t h e cau s e an d t hei r i m m ed i at e

fam i l i es o r g u ard i an s , at t o rn ey s an d t h ei r s ecret ari es , o ffi cers o f th e

co u rt

, v i ct im as s i s t an ce co o rd i nat o rs , vi ct im s ’ ad v o cat es , an d s u ch o t h er

v i ct i m as s i s t an ce p ers o n n el as p ro v i d ed fo r b y Co d e Sect i on 1 5-1 8 -1 4 .2

, ju ro rs , n ews p ap er rep o rt ers o r b ro ad cas t ers , an d co u rt rep o rt ers

. 3

OCGA § 1 7 -8 -5 4

.

Here, ho wev er, t h e t ri al co u rt p l ai n l y o rd ered t h at th e o nl y p ers o ns wh o wo u ld

b e al l o wed t o rem ai n i n t h e co u rt ro o m were t h e co u rt rep o rt er , t h e b ai li ff, co u rt

3 W e n o t e t h at OCGA § 1 7 -8 -5 3 al l o ws t h e t ri al ju d g e d i s cret i o n t o cl ear t h e

co u rt ro o m o f “ al l o r an y p o rt i o n o f t h e au d i en ce” if t h e ev i d en ce i n a t ri al i s “ v u l g ar

an d o bs cen e o r rel at es t o t h e i m p ro per act s o f t h e s ex es , an d t en d s t o deb au ch t h e

m o ral s o f t h e y o u n g .” OCGA § 1 7 -8 -5 3

. Gi ven t h at OCGA § 1 7-8 -5 3 refers t o a t ri al

co u rt ’ s di s cr et i o n a ry p o w er, an d t h e t ri al co u rt i n d i cat ed t h at i t b el iev ed i t was

r eq u ir ed t o cl ear t h e co u rt ro o m , w e wi l l n o t p res u m e t h at t h e t ri al co u rt rel i ed o n OCGA § 1 7-8 -5 3 wh en i t cl o s ed th e co u rt ro om

. W e n ot e, ho wev er, t h at o ur p o s t u re

s h o u ld no t b e co n s t ru ed as a ru l i n g o r su g g es t i o n t h at a t ri al co u r t n e e d n o t e n g ag e i n t he W a l l er an al y s i s b efo re cl o s in g t h e co u rt ro o m u n der OCGA § 1 7-8 -5 3

.

7s ecu ri t y , cl erk

, p ro s ecu t or, t h e v i ct i m , an d th e v i ct i m ’ s m o t h er (wh o se p res en ce t h e

St at e ex p l i ci t l y req u es ted ). Th e t ri al co u rt th en req u ired an y o t her fri en d s an d fam i l y

m em b ers t o l eav e. An d ev en aft er Sp i kes ’ co u n sel rep eat ed l y ex p l ai n ed t h at Sp i k es ’

fam i l y m em

b ers were p res en t i n t h e co u rt ro o m , t h e t ri al co u rt m ad e n o i n q u i ry

wh at s o ev er reg ard i n g t h ei r rel at i o n t o Sp i k es , n o r d i d i t o rd er t h at Sp i k es ’ i m m ed i at e

fam i l y m em

b ers wo u l d b e p erm i t t ed t o rem ai n

. Co m p are Hu nt

, s u pra, 2 6 8 Ga. Ap p.

at 5 71 (1 ) (reco g n i zi n g t h at i f t h e d efen d an t h ad o b ject ed

, t h e t ri al co u rt wo u l d h av e

h ad an o p p o rt u n i ty ei t h er t o al l o w t h e d efen d a n t ’s i m m ed i at e fam il y an d an y p res s

m e m b e r s t o rem ai n i n t h e co u rt ro o m o r t o en gag e i n t h e fo ur-p art W a ll er i n q u i r y) ;

Ch a mb er l a i n v. S ta t e , 3 4 7 Ga. Ap p . 7 7 5

, 7 7 9 -7 8 0 (2 ) (8 1 9 SE2 d 3 0 3 ) (2 0 1 8 ) (aft er

t h e defen s e o b

ject ed t o t h e cl eari n g o f t he co urt ro o m , t h e t ri al co u rt i n v o k ed OCGA

§ 1 7-8 -5 4

, i n d i cat ed th at al l p ers o n s w h o d i d n o t fal l u nd er th e st at ut e had t o l eav e

d u ri n g th e v ict i m ’ s t es t i m o ny , an d d et erm i n ed t h at t h e d efen d an t ’ s s is ter-i n -l aw was

n o t h i s “ i m

m ed i at e fam i ly ” u n d er t he s t at u t e). Th u s , t h e t ri al co u rt ’ s cl o su re h ere was

n o t a p a r t i al cl o su re t h at co m p ort ed wi th OCGA § 1 7-8 -5 4

. In s t ead

, t h e co u rt ro o m

cl o s u re i n t h i s cas e i s s i m il ar t o t h e t o t al cl o s u re t h at was u n d er co n s i d erat i o n in

Ja cks o n , s u p ra, 3 3 9 G a. Ap p

. at 3 1 7 (a), wh ere we co n cl ud ed t hat t h e c o u rt ro o m

cl o s u re w as t o t al b ecau s e t h e S t at e req u es t ed t hat t h e co u rt ro o m b e cl o s ed t o t h e

8d efen d an t ’ s ex ten d ed fam i l y an d n o n -co u rt ro o m p ers o n n el

, an d t h e t ri al co u rt cl eared

t h e co u rt ro o m o f al l p ers o n s wh o were n o t l aw en fo rcem en t o r in v o l v ed i n t h e co u rt

s y s t em

. In t h i s cas e, t h e p ro s ecu t o r “ as k [ed ] th at t h e c o u rt ro o m b e cl eared o f

an y b o d y ,” an d t h e t ri al co u rt t h en o rd ered t he co u rt ro o m cl o s ed t o al l “ n o n -es s en t i al ”

p ers o n n el

.

Al t h ou g h t h e t ri al co u rt p erm i t t ed t h e v i ct i m ’ s m o t h er t o rem ai n at t h e St at e’ s

req u es t

, we are w ho l l y un p ers u ad ed th at al l owi n g th e p res en ce o f t h at s i n g l e

i n d i v i d u al o bv i at ed t h e n eed fo r cas e-s p eci fi c fi n d i n gs

. “ In g i v in g co n ten t t o t h e

co n st i t u t io n al an d s tat u t o ry co m m an d s t h at an accu s ed be g iv en a pu b l i c t ri al

, wi t h o ut

ex cep t i o n al l co urt s h av e h el d th at an accu s ed i s at t he v ery l eas t en t i tl ed t o h av e h i s

fri en ds

, rel at i v es an d co u n s el p res en t

, n o m at t er wi t h wh at offen s e h e m ay b e

ch arg ed

. ” (Ci t at i o n an d pu n ct u at i o n o m i t t ed .) P ur vi s , s u p ra, 2 8 8 Ga. at 8 6 7 (1 ). An d

“ [i ] t i s th e g en eral p o l i cy o f ou r l aw t h at a t ri al o f a cas e i n co u rt b e op en an d p u b l i c

an d f r ee fr o m s ecr ecy s av e t h e del i b erat i o n s o f t he ju ry .” (Em p h as is s u p p li ed .) Gr a nt

v. Ha r t

, 1 9 7 Ga. 6 6 2, 6 7 1 (1 ) (3 0 SE2 d 2 7 1 ) (1 9 4 4). “ Th ere are, m o reo v er, d eg rees

o f p art i al cl o s u re, s o m e o f wh ich m i g ht ap p ro ach a t o t al cl o s u re in p ract i cal effect .”

Ti n s l ey v. Un i t ed St a t es , 86 8 A2 d 8 6 7

, 87 4 (II) (D.C. 2 0 0 5 ). In d ee d

, wh i l e t h e

v i ct i m ’ s m o t h er was p erm i t t ed t o o b serv e t h e v i ct i m ’ s tes t i m o n y , al l o f t h e

9d efen d an t ’s f am i l y m em

b ers were o rd ered to l eav e an d t h e reco rd s u g ges t s t h at n o

o t h er s pect at o rs were p res en t

. Th e cl o s u re i n t h i s cas e t h u s i m p l i cat ed t h e s am e

s ecrecy co n cern s as a t o tal cl o s u re. See W hi t s o n v. S t a te

, 7 9 1 So 2 d 54 4

, 5 4 6

, n .3 (Fl a.

1 s t DCA 2 0 0 1 ) (ex p l ai ni n g t h at al t h o ug h t he v i ct i m ’ s m o t h er an d a v i ct i m ad v o cat e

were p res en t d u ri n g t he v i ct i m ’ s t e s t i m o n y , “ t h e p ro h i b i t i o n ag ai n s t cl o s u re o f a

co u rt ro o m wi t ho u t an ap p ro p ri at e i n q u i ry , i n u res to t he ben efi t of t h e p ub l i c at l arg e

a n d t he accu s ed

, u n d er t h e Fi rs t an d Si x t h Am en d m en t s to t h e U n i t ed St at e s

Co n s t i t u t i o n , ” an d t h u s t h e s i t u at i o n warran t ed t h e sam e an al y s i s as a t o t al cl o s u re);

Lo n g u s v. S t a t e , 7 A3 d 6 4

, 7 5 (III) (M d

. Ct

. Ap p

. 2 0 1 0 ) (“ [I] n s o m e cas es , m em b ers

o f t h e d efen d an t ’ s fam i l y o r fri en d s m ay b e t h e o n l y sp ect at ors , wh i ch wo u l d m ak e

a ‘ p art i al ’ cl o s u re u n d er t h o s e ci rcu m s tan ces a d e fact o to t al cl o s u re.”); Demo u ey v.

S t a t e , 20 2 So 3 d 3 55

, 3 60 -3 61 (Al a. Cri m

. Ap p

. 2 0 1 5 ) (t ri al co u rt ’ s d eci s io n t o cl ear

t h e c o u rt ro o m o f al l t h e d efen d an t ’ s s u p p ort ers was a d e fact o t o t al cl o s ure o f t h e

co u rt ro o m , wh i ch i nv o k es t h e W a l l er t es t ). Co m

p are S t a t e v. Ro l

f e , 8 5 1 NW 2 d 8 9 7,

9 0 3 (1 6) (S.D. 2 0 14 ) (d et erm in i n g th at t h e cl o s ure was p art i al b ecau se th e t ri al co u rt

p erm i t t ed m ed ia rep res en t at iv es t o rem ai n an d t h erefo re t h e cl o s u re d id n o t i m p l i cat e

t h e s am e s ecrecy an d fai rn es s co n cern s as a t ot al cl o s u re).

10Th e co u rt ro o m cl o s u re i n t h i s cas e was , effect i v el y , a to t al cl o s ure, wh i ch “ d id

n o t co m pl y wi th co n s t i t u t i o nal req u i rem en t s b ecau s e t h e tri al co u rt m ad e n o fi n d i ng s

ad eq uat e t o s u p p o rt th e cl o s u re, i n cl u d i n g a co ns i d erat i o n o f reas o n able a l t ern at i v es .”

Ja cks o n , s up ra, 3 3 9 Ga. Ap p

. at 3 1 9 ( 2 ) (b ). In deed

, t h e t ri al co u rt el i ci t ed n o

i n fo rm at i o n b efo re cl o s i n g t h e co urt ro o m

. A l t h o u g h th e tri al co u rt cu rs o ri l y

m en t i o n ed p ro t ect i n g t h e m i n o r’ s p ri v acy, a t ri al co u rt ’ s fi n d i n g s m u s t be “ s p eci fi c

en o ug h th at a rev i ewi n g co u rt can d et erm i n e w h et h er t h e cl os u re o rd er was p ro p erl y

en t ered .” (Ci t at io n o m it t ed .) G o l d s t ei n v. S t at e , 2 83 Ga. Ap p

. 1

, 3 (2 ) (6 4 0 SE2 d 5 9 9 )

(2 0 0 6). See Ro ckd

a l e Ci t i z en Pu b li s h i n g Co

. v. S t a t e , 2 6 6 Ga. 9 2

, 9 4 (1 ) (4 6 3 SE2 d

8 6 4 ) (1 9 95 ) (t ri al co u rt ’ s co n cl us o ry s tat em en t th at i t had co n s i d ered t h e al tern at i v es

t o cl o s u re an d fo u n d t h em t o b e i n su ffi ci en t u n d er t h e ci rcu m s t an ces o f t h e cas e was

n o t sp eci fi c en o u g h t o en ab l e t h e Co u rt t o d et erm i n e t h at t h e cl o s u re o rd er was

en t ered p ro p erl y ). Acco rd i n g ly , t h e cl o su re h ere co n s t i t u t ed rev ers i b l e erro r.

(c) S p ikes i s en t i tl ed

t o a n ew t r i a l

.

J u s t as in Ja cks on , rem an d i s n ot av ai l ab le i n t h i s cas e b ecau s e “ t h e co u rt

cl o s ed t h e co u rt ro om d u ri n g t h e m o s t cri ti cal t es ti m o n y o f t h e tri al i t s el f. Th ere i s n o

way to rem ed y t h at e rro r s h o rt o f a new t ri al .” Ja cks o n , su p ra, 3 3 9 G a. Ap p

. at 3 2 0

(c). W h i le we are n o t i n s en s i t i v e t o t h e v ict i m h av i n g to tes t ify ab ou t t h e i n ci d en t

11ag ai n , we are d u t y -b o u nd to ab id e b y Un i t ed St at es Su p rem e Co u rt p reced en t

, an d we

m u st rev e r s e Sp i k es ’ co nv i ct i o ns

. 4 Nev ert hel es s , t h e ev i d en ce was m o re t h an

s u ffi ci en t t o s u p p o rt h is co nv i ct i o ns , an d d o u b l e jeo p ard y d o es n o t b ar Sp ik es fro m

b ei n g ret ri ed . See i d

.

Ju d g men t r ever sed a n d ca s e r ema nd

ed . Ri ckma n a n d

Rees e, JJ., co n cu r

.

4 I n Sa n d if

er v. S t a t e , 31 8 Ga. Ap p. 6 30

, 6 3 2 (1 ) (7 3 4 SE2 d 4 6 4 ) ( 2 0 1 2 )

, w e d et erm i n ed t h at t h e d efen d an t was n o t h arm ed b y t he t ri al co u rt ’ s d eci s i o n t o rem o v e

t h e d e f e n d an t ’ s s is t er fro m t h e co u rt ro o m wh i l e al l o wi ng t h e v ict i m s ’ fam i l i es to

rem ai n

. I n t h at cas e, h o wev er, t h e i s su e b efo re t h e Co u rt was no t th e t ri al co urt ’ s fai l u re t o p e r f

o r m a W a l l er an al y s i s in fu rt h eran ce o f t h e defen d an t ’ s Si x th

Am en d m en t p u b l ic-t ri al g u aran t ee. See al s o S t ep h en s v. S ta t e , 2 6 1 G a. 46 7

, 4 6 9 -4 7 0 (7 ) (4 05 SE2 d 4 8 3) (1 9 9 1 ) (d ecl i n in g t o v i ew as h arm l es s th e t ri al co urt ’ s fai l u re to
fo l l o w th e ap p li cab l e req u i rem en t s fo r co u rt ro o m cl o s u re, i ncl u d i n g m ak in g wri t t en fi nd i ng s o f fact an d co ncl u s i o n s o f l aw).

12