FOOTE v. STATE

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• concluding that the trial court properly appraised legitimate concerns that open proceeding posed reasonable probability of prejudice to defendants’ fair trial rights
• recognizing that “[f]or many centuries, both civil and criminal trials have traditionally been open to the public”
• holding that, given the defendant's waiver, the public cannot demand a jury trial based on social interest in that mode of fact-finding and cannot prevent a continuance to protect speedy trial right
• holding that the Sixth Amendment's guarantee of a public trial is personal to the defendant and does not confer any independent constitutional right upon members of the public to attend such trial
• holding that, given the defendant’s waiver, the public cannot demand a jury trial based on social interest in that mode of fact finding and cannot prevent a continuance to protect speedy trial right
• noting that open proceedings allow the public to see that a defendant “is fairly dealt with and not unjustly condemned”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).