Opinion ID: 2551468
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 20

Heading: Refusal to Unseal Portions of the Record

Text: Defendant contends that the trial court violated the Fifth, Eighth, and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution, and state law, when it denied his postjudgment motion, filed July 18, 1991, to unseal certain portions of the record on appeal. The court ruled in essence, in a tentative decision and order filed September 18, 1991, that apparently became final, that it lacked the authority to do so. There was no constitutional violation. ( People v. Price (1991) 1 Cal.4th 324, 492-494, 3 Cal.Rptr.2d 106, 821 P.2d 610.) Nor was there a violation of state law. (Ibid.) Indeed, rule 39.51(b) of the California Rules of Court, put into effect March 1, 1997, provides: All transcripts of in camera proceedings shall be sealed and copies provided only to the reviewing court and to counsel for those parties present at the proceedings. (Italics added.) Rule 33.5(b), put into effect July 1, 1990, has the same effect.