An open hearing is not required for an inquiry into the availability of a victim who gave testimony earlier.
The court ruled that the Sixth Amendment right to a public trial was not violated because the question of the victim's willingness to testify did not form part of the prosecution and the public did not have a strong interest in hearing the victim reiterate his refusal to take the stand. The court ruled that "whether [the victim] would testify was a collateral matter concerning a qusion of law," and "there were no allegations of government misconduct that required circulation in the fresh air that accompanies public observation."
Citing the First Circuit Court of Appeals, the court indicated that the right of a public trial does not attach to an offer of proof hearing. The court looked to a Fifth Circuit decision showing that in-chambers discussions addressing "technical legal questions" such as issues about jurors, evidentiary questions, and a discussion with the defendant about witnesses he wished to subpoena for his defense, need not be conducted in public.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.