Document: 478 U.S. 1 106 S.Ct. 2735 92 L.Ed.2d PRESS-ENTERPRISE COMPANY, etc., Petitionerv.SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA FOR the COUNTY RIVERSIDE. No. 84-1560. Argued Feb. 26, 1986. Decided June 30, Syllabus California filed a complaint against nurse charging him with murdering 12 patients by administering massive doses of heart drug lidocaine. The Magistrate granted defendant's motion to exclude public from preliminary hearing on under statute that requires such proceedings be open unless "exclusion is necessary in order protect right fair and impartial trial." At conclusion 41-day hearing, refused petitioner's request transcript released. Thereafter, State, supported petitioner opposed defendant, moved unsuccessfully Superior Court have Petitioner then peremptory writ mandate Appeal. Meanwhile, defendant waived his jury trial, released transcript. After holding controversy was not moot, Appeal denied writ. Supreme also writ, there no general First Amendment access hearings, if establishes "reasonable likelihood substantial prejudice," burden shifts prosecution or media show preponderance evidence reasonable probability prejudice. Held: 1. Even though ultimately question, case moot because "capable repetition, yet evading review." Globe Newspaper Co. v. Court, 457 596, 102 2613, 73 248; Gannett DePasquale, 443 368, 99 2898, 61 608. Thus, this has jurisdiction. P. 6. 2. qualified criminal applies hearings as conducted California. First, been tradition accessibility type As grand proceedings, before neutral detached magistrates public. Second, essential proper functioning justice system. This made any less fact cannot result conviction adjudication magistrate without jury. absence makes importance even more significant. Pp. 6-13. 3. Since attaches California, closed specific, record findings are demonstrating "closure preserve higher values narrowly tailored serve interest." Press-Enterprise 464 501, 510, 104 819, 824, 78 629. If interest asserted shall "substantial probability" will prejudiced publicity closure would prevent alternatives adequately right. Here, likelihood" test applied placed lesser than required Amendment. Moreover, court failed consider whether short protected interests. 13-15. 37 Cal.3d 772, 773, 209 Cal.Rptr. 360, 691 P.2d 1026, reversed. BURGER, C.J., delivered opinion which BRENNAN, WHITE, MARSHALL, BLACKMUN, POWELL, O'CONNOR, JJ., joined. STEVENS, J., dissenting opinion, Part II REHNQUIST, joined, post, p. 15. James D. Ward, Riverside, Cal., for petitioner. Joyce Ellen M. Reikes, respondent. Chief Justice BURGER Court. We certiorari decide growing out prosecution. 2 * On December 23, 1981, State Riverside County Municipal Robert Diaz counts murder seeking death penalty. alleged Diaz, nurse, murdered commenced July 6, 1982. Cal. Penal Code Ann. § 868 (West 1985), trial."1 unopposed motion, finding had attracted national "only one side may get reported media." App. 22a. 3 continued 41 days. Most testimony presented medical scientific; remainder consisted personnel who worked when died. did introduce evidence, but counsel subjected most witnesses vigorous cross-examination. held answer all charges. Company asked sealed record. 4 January 21, 1983, public; later joined support motion. contending release prejudicial pretrial publicity. found information "as factual it could be," facts were neither "inflammatory" nor "exciting," was, nonetheless, "a part transcripts might prejudice Id., at 60a-61a. 5 That originally but, after being so ordered set matter hearing. trial mandate. 6 thereafter mandate, hearings. 1026 (1984). reasoned recognized 629 (1984) (Press-Enterprise I), 248 (1982), extended only actual trials. Cal.3d, 776, Cal.Rptr., 362, P.2d, 1028. Furthermore, reasons closing I Globe—the interests other third parties—were same case—the uninfluenced news accounts. 7 Having access, considered circumstances statute, Cal.Penal 1985). Under reasoned, prejudice" 782, 366, 1032. 8 certiorari. 474 899, 224, 88 223 (1985). reverse. 9 must first we jurisdiction Article III, 2, Constitution. In challenges Court's original refusal noted above, specific relief seeks already granted—the trial. However, Newspaper, supra, U.S., 603, S.Ct., 2618, 377-378, 2904-05, 608 (1979), " 'capable review.' It can reasonably assumed similar and, typically duration, an likely evade review. Gannett, therefore, require moot. Accordingly, turn merits. III 10 important identify precisely what decided: 11 "[W]e conclude close upon impinge code section clear primary public's give way conflict." 781, difficult disagree abstract court's analysis balancing access. remember these necessarily inconsistent. Plainly, repeatedly recognized, means assuring process observers. 13 shared accused public, common concern assurance fairness. Only recently, Waller Georgia, 467 39, 2210, 81 31 (1984), example, Sixth prevented suppression over objection. instances attach "the explicit protective implicit press public." 46, 2215. When objects party advances overriding prejudiced. 47, 2216. 14 unlike Waller, since requested Instead, here See 397, 2914 (POWELL, concurring). concluded implicated proceeding question resolved solely label event, i.e., "trial" otherwise, particularly where functions much like full-scale 15 cases dealing claim our decisions emphasized two complementary considerations. because, 'tradition implies favorable judgment experiences' 605, 2619 (quoting Richmond Newspapers, Inc. Virginia, 448 555, 589, 100 2814, 2834, 65 973 (1980) (BRENNAN, concurring judgment)), place historically 16 I, observed "since development jury, selection jurors presumptively exceptions good cause shown." 505, 822. reviewed some early history England's trials day "town meeting." days Norman Conquest, brought "moots," collection freemen community. "one qualities justice" England, Colonies. There risks, course, inherent meeting" trial—the risk become gathering emotions passions nature crime; "lynch mob" ambience hardly conducive calm, decision-making based evidence. Plainly modern interrogation possible bias far cry meeting trial" ancient English practice. Yet procedural protections their origin common-law principle provided, rather rules conduct those attend 567, 2822. 17 setting traditionally plays significant positive role particular question. 606, 2619. Although many governmental processes operate best scrutiny, takes little imagination recognize kinds government operations totally frustrated openly. A classic example system depends secrecy proceedings." Douglas Oil Petrol Stops Northwest, 441 211, 218, 1667, 1672, 60 156 (1979). Other plainly summarized holdings prior cases, noting openness trials, including jurors, "enhances both basic fairness appearance confidence system." 820. 18 These considerations experience logic are, related, shape processes. passes tests logic, attaches. But attaches, absolute. While assurances accused, limited undermined publicity.2 determine situation rights override stated: 19 "[T]he presumption overcome interest. articulated along enough reviewing properly entered." 824. IV A. 20 led apply Newspapers lead us 21 Long ago celebrated Aaron Burr treason, Marshall sitting judge, probable-cause Hall House Delegates courtroom too small accommodate crush interested citizens. United States Burr, 25 F.Cas. (No. 14,692) (CC Va.1807). From until present day, near uniform practice state federal courts court.3 several following New York Field Criminal Procedure published 1850 allowed accused. 390-391, 2911. shown.4 Open accorded 'the experience.' Globe, 22 second they process. determined sufficiently justify conclusion. 23 bring felon prosecutor choice securing indictment probable indicted however, he absolute elaborate magistrate. Hawkins 584, 150 435, 437, 586 916, 918 (1978). personally appear represented counsel, cross-examine hostile witnesses, exculpatory illegally obtained §§ 859-866 1538.5 Supp.1986). determines exists, bound trial; leads guilty plea majority cases. 24 true judicial officer features, standing alone, do make overall Because its extensive scope, often final step proceeding. 46-47, 2215-2216. stated San Jose Mercury-News 30 498, 511, 179 780, 638 655, 663 provides sole occasion observation 572, 2825. Similarly, long "an inestimable safeguard corrupt overzealous complaint, biased, eccentric judge," Duncan Louisiana, 391 145, 156, 1444, 1451, 491 (1968), "People society demand infallibility institutions, them accept prohibited observing." 26 Denying frustrate characterized "community therapeutic value" openness. 570, 2824. acts, especially certain violent crimes, provoke concern, outrage, hostility. "When aware law enforced functioning, outlet provided understandable reactions emotions." 509, 823. H. Weihofen, Urge Punish 130-131 (1956); T. Reik, Compulsion Confess (1959). sum: 27 "The value lies people actually attending standards observed; sure knowledge anyone free gives established procedures followed deviations known. Openness thus enhances 508, 823 (emphasis original). 28 therefore B 29 858 et seq. 606-607, 2619-2620. that, first, second, rights. supra; 581, 2829. interpreting prejudice." itself acknowledged, places hold called ibid.; see id., 783, 367, 1033 (Lucas, dissenting). complete observed: "Publicity concerning involved poses special risks unfairness. whole purpose screen unreliable insure does known Cf. Jackson Denno, 378 368 [84 1774, 908]. Publicity influence inform potential inculpatory wholly inadmissible 378, 2905. 32 automatically refusing every suppress. Through voir dire, cumbersome circumstances, whose disable rendering verdict. And justified suppress, entire rarely warranted. conclusory assertion deprive limitation "narrowly 33 standard proceedings. 34 ordered. 35 whom REHNQUIST joins II, dissenting. 36 constitutional members insist during period prosecutor, judge agreed sealing assure sought consists 4,239 pages heard eight weeks. testimony, contained 47 volumes, accuses Mr. hospital injecting lethal drug. reveals defense put own. 38 Immediately client's transcript, words Magistrate, revealed story." 28a. Magistrate's characterization dangerous individual is." 27a. oppose objection, sealed. 39 unseal He found—and amply record—that "there making 61a. Accord, 62a. earlier rejected restrictive concluding protect" "[fair trial] seal transcript." 37a.1 40 superior order." Pet. Cert. E-11. confirmed judge's determinations indicative prosecutorial case," E-14; overborne trial," E-9; "[a]lternatives suffice E-14.2 similarly affirming showing 1032 view obvious legitimate reason sooner did. His decision violate Amendment, objected 383-384, 2907, my either. 42 perhaps obvious, bears emphasis publish otherwise communicate lawfully unlawfully acquired. right, core erased legacy restraints publication drafters rebelled, Grosjean American Press Co., 297 233, 245-250, 56 444, 447-449, 80 L.Ed. 660 (1936), objective highest attainable intrusive way. See, e.g., Smith Daily Mail Publishing 97, 101-106, 2667, 2669-2672, 399 (1979); Landmark Communications, 435 829, 837-845, 98 1535, 1540-1544, (1978); Oklahoma District 430 308, 310-312, 97 1045, 1046-1047, 51 535 (1977) (per curiam ); Nebraska Assn. Stuart, 427 539, 556-570, 96 2791, 2806-2808, 49 683 (1976); Cox Broadcasting Corp. Cohn, 420 469, 487-497, 95 1029, 1042-1047, 43 328 (1975). case, contrast, publicize possession, acquire thereto. believed construction embraces about affairs. 44 "As Madison wrote: 45 'A popular Government, information, acquiring it, Prologue Farce Tragedy; or, both. Knowledge forever govern ignorance: mean own Governors, arm themselves power gives.' Writings 103 (G. Hunt ed. 1910). 46 "It sufficient, channels communication restraints. Without protection acquisition operation institutions prisons large, self-governance contemplated Framers stripped substance. "For entitled measure protection." Houchins KQED, Inc., 438 1, 31-32, 2588, 2605, 57 553 (1978) (STEVENS, dissenting).3 48 Neither elected appointed representatives abridge flow simply activities scrutiny. An official policy justification serves office. Pell Procunier, 417 817, 94 2800, 495 (1974), Saxbe Washington Post 843, 2811, 514 warden's regulation prearranged inmate interviews disciplinary penological basis "not attempt conceal conditions press' investigation reporting conditions." 830, 2808. 848, 2814. Likewise, "was given appropriate deference nisi prius court," 392, 2911, entered "finding pose 'reasonable defendants,' 376, 2903. Conversely, (1980), violation "total order," 2831 580-581, 2829 (opinion C.J.). infirmity afflicted excluding minor victims sex-offense 608-609, 2620-2621, (1982) ("the indicates willing testify despite presence press" (footnote omitted)), dire 510-511, 824-825, ("prolonged unsupported findings"); 513 826 ("trial explanation" "broad order"); 515, 827 (BLACKMUN, 48, n. 7, 49, 8, 2216, 2217, (1984).4 always apparent freedom obtain disclosing, 621, 2627 dissenting), narrower disseminate "virtually absolute" contexts, 582, 2830 perfectly obvious. For me, countervailing publishing later. 393, 2912 (upholding "any denial temporary"). prompt view—is greater transcripts. explained fully below, legitimacy am unpersuaded difference between procedure determining adopted strengthens case. 50 nevertheless reaches opposite applying "two considerations," ante, "experience logic," 9. view, reasoning precedents. historical proffered probative adduced granting time ratified suggested intention expectation ratifiers remain open. 564, 2820, THE CHIEF JUSTICE "[w]hat purposes throughout evolution, cared observe." demonstrates conclusively organic laws adopted, England open." 569, 2823 added). History relevant demonstrated "[t]he Bill Rights enacted backdrop Public regarded aspect itself." 575, 2826. 2619, concerned presumptive relied expressly point "at adopted." 2823. Later, quoted identical passage 821, "[p]ublic America Constitution adopted," To dispel doubt regarding significance address—whether open—focuses . enacted." mattered primarily intentions 52 uncontroverted inhere provision intended Stewart wrote DePasquale: 53 "[T]here exists persuasive proceedings; indeed, contrary. By adoption Constitution, never degree 54 "Under law, E.g., E. Jenks, Book Law 75 (6th 1967) ('It must, remembered, prefatory stages .'); F. Maitland, Police 129 (1885) (The 'preliminary examination persons gradually very form. indeed "open excluded thinks ends answered .'). Indictable Offences Act, & Vict., ch. 42, (1848) (providing should deemed excluded); Magistrates' Courts Geo. Eliz. 55, 4(2) (1952) (same)." 387-389, 2909-2910 (footnotes omitted).5 55 included discussion quotation Lord Ellenborough; explains, today proceedings: "If thing another administration justice, jurymen come guilt innocence decide, minds pure unprejudiced. Trials fairly reported, although occasionally prove injurious individuals, privileged. Let continue examinations privilege. Their tendency prejudge still presumes innocent, poison sources justice." King Fisher, Camp. 563, 570-571, 170 Eng.Rep. 1253, 1255 (N.P.1811). analysis, lengthy disquisition generally States, numbering Michigan among them, re Midland Mich. 148, 162, 172-174, 362 N.W.2d 580, 588, 593-594 closed.6 paraphrase McMillan Pennsylvania, 477 79, 80, 2411, 2419, 91 67 (1986) omitted), States" different "is merely reflection system, demands '[t]olerance spectrum problem enforcement,' Spencer Texas, 385 554, 566, 87 648, 606 (1967). [California's] approach few render [its] unconstitutional." admonished: "confus[e] existence 389, 19, 2910, 19. recent developments relevant, all, insofar suggest merit "beneficial effects scrutiny." 492, 1044. crutch carry weight opening closed; determination stand fall satisfies component test. 58 proves little, 'value openness,' 823), relies much, scrutiny California" (a comforting phrase invoked form times opinion).7 brief, rationale "California hearing" proceeding"; system' "; lacks jury; denies community catharsis. Ante, 12, (quotation omitted). defect secret force just "final step" "sole occasion" critics maintain protects well legally knowledgeable presides Cal.2d 590, 438-439, 919-920 (holding deprivation constitute equal total captive who, candid, concede indict anybody, time, almost anything, jury' Campbell, Eliminate Grand Jury, 64 J.Crim.L. C. 174 (1973))). Finally, juries rage. explanatory veneer away, emerges reality functionally traditional Coleridge, B. 37, 49-50, 107 15, 19-20 (1822), 395, n., 2913, added): 59 'It [the proceeding] inquiry, sufficient ground commit prisoner nature, difficult, deny that. makes, mind, difference.' reasoning—if carried logical outcome—thus contravenes "long-established maintains courts" States. Procter Gamble 356 677, 681, 983, 985, 1077 (1958). "Despite hampered, regularly Branzburg Hayes, 408 665, 684-685, 2646, 2658, 626 (1972). previously described "indispensable," Johnson, 319 503, 513, 63 1233, 1238, 1546 (1943), remarked proceedings,' Sells Engineering, 463 418, 424, 3133, 3138, 77 743 (1983) (1979)).8 fact, extends beyond confines encompass civil docket well. explained: 62 rule short, principled scope defined text structure "Indeed, advantages equally applicable context. salutary effect publicity, strong as, stronger than, cases." 386-387, 2908-2909, Seattle Times Rhinehart, 20, 29-37, 2199, 2205-2210, (newspaper privy litigant action). Despite valiant limit holding, ratio decidendi today's knows bounds. abjuring strict reliance emphasizing broad openness, tacitly recognizes generally. Regrettably, taken seriously requirement "compelling" "overriding" 'narrowly interest.' 820); 824 607, 2620). 13-14. standard—as two-part formed today—originated "helpful principles" BRENNAN's eloquent concurrence 2834. '[t]here restrictions action clothed ingenious argument garb decreased data flow,' 2833 Zemel Rusk, 381 16-17, 85 1271, 1280-1281, (1965)), and—in contrast today—stressed "[a]n prerogative gather accordingly assayed considering opposing invaded," omitted)—a sensitivity practical necessities reasoning," ibid. denying done compelling interest/least 19-20, grounds thought "compelling," 511-512, 825 (privacy venirepersons proceeding); 600, 2840 (Stewart, judgment). 66 affirmance. constitutionally grounded reputational not, provide delaying least taking verbal formulation seriously, reverses—without comment explanation reconciliation—the unfortunate neglects opportunity fit into body precedent fear further unsettle area. respectfully dissent. Section 868, amended 1982, full: exclusion person except clerk, reporter bailiff, her Attorney General, district attorney county, investigating officer, having custody witness while testifying, chosen prosecuting himself herself moral support, discuss person, witness, examination. Nothing affect 687 Code." Before gave unqualified attack old 655 Legislature include "necessary implicated. sex crimes trauma embarrassment aspects 607-610, 2620-2622. vast issue Arkansas Television Tedder, 281 Ark. 152, 662 S.W.2d (1983); Miami Herald Lewis, 426 So.2d (Fla.1982); R.W. Page Lumpkin, 249 Ga. 576, 578-579, 292 S.E.2d 815, 819 (1982); Pacific Richardson, Haw. 580 ex rel. Post-Tribune Porter 274 Ind. 408, 412 N.E.2d 748 (1980); Ashland Asbury, 612 749, 752 (Ky.App.1980); Great Falls Tribune 186 Mont. 433, 116 Keene Cheshire 119 N.H. 710, 406 A.2d 137 Williams, 93 N.J. 459 641 Westchester Rockland Leggett, N.Y.2d 430, 439, 423 N.Y.S.2d 630, 635, 518, 523 Minot News Holum, 380 347 (N.D.1986); Dayton Phillips, Ohio St.2d 457, 351 127 Philadelphia Jerome, Pa. 484, 387 425, 434 Kearns-Tribune 685 515 (Utah 1984); Assn., Ellison, 138 Vt. 529, 534, 419 323, 326 Federated Publications, Kurtz, Wash.2d 51, 615 440 Hamilton, 165 W.Va. 103, 267 544 Williams Stafford, 589 322 (Wyo.1979). Publishing, 173, 593 (proceedings leading person's public). counterpart, apply. Iowa Freedom Information Council Wifvat, 920 (Iowa 1983); Minneapolis Star Kammeyer, 341 550 (Minn.1983); Commonwealth, 222 Va. 574, 915 (1981). McKenna, Idaho 647, 309 206 (1957); Davis Sheriff, Nev. 569 402 (1977). Arizona, Iowa, Montana, North Dakota, Utah statutes Code, 391, each either Phoenix 101 Ariz. 257, 418 594 (1966); Wifrat, Commonwealth 489 419, 414 318 supra. ruling, affirmative duty 37a, 2904, (1979) ("To due minimize Constitution's pervasive rights, surely take measures strictly inescapably necessary" (citation omitted)). Indeed, employment tend exacerbate existing E-15 added citation 586-589, 2832-2834, judgment); 862-864, 2821-2822, (1974) footnote separate writing Houchins, appended Stewart's 728, 2673, (1972) added), news, dimensions, exist." observation, acknowledging "news protections," 707, 2670, "without eviscerated," 2656. 1280-81, (1965) ("The speak unrestrained information" added)). why plaintiffs end concealing prison "Those confidentiality. officials manner administer, citizens fellow confined." 35-36, 2607. seemed "official arbitrarily cutting off source abridges speech Fourteenth Amendments Constitution." 38, 2608 Geis, Preliminary Hearings Press, UCLA L.Rev. (1961) ("Preliminary colonies closely prescriptions sixteenth-century statutes" pointed "[a]t [i.e., favor closure] preceded 394, 2912. "[N]o ever 'right' available [that adopted]." 396, 2913. Ironically, thus—surprisingly—part trend many—if most—of state-court collected personal see, 409-410, 748, 750 Azbill 84 414, 442 918-919 commonly, potentially equivalent Burak, Conn.Supp. 627, 431 1246, 1248 (1981) ("likelihood prejudice"); Edwards, 1321, 1345 (D.C.1981) ("likelihood"), cert. denied, 455 1022, 1721, 72 141 ("substantial likelihood"); 442, 637, 525 ("strong 1984) (" 'realistic prejudice' "); 915, 923 ("likelihood"); 62, 440, 446 jeopardy"), presumably heavily dependent (even law), remarkable finds excess met Given focus general, served 13, relevance bear outward resemblance extent matters evidence," (citing 1982)), mention reformed reforms, W. LaFave J. Israel, 15.2(b) decision, wonder enjoys Five commonly secrecy: '(1) escape contemplated; (2) utmost deliberations, subject friends importuning jurors; (3) subornation perjury tampering [the] it; (4) encourage untrammeled disclosures respect commission crimes; (5) innocent exonerated disclosure investigation, expense guilt.' 219, 10, 1673, Rose, 215 F.2d 617, 628-629 (CA3 1954)); 986, (1958) (same). Illinois Abbott Associates, 460 557, 566-567, 11, 1356, 1360-61, (1983).

Category: 2