Requiring Those Entering Courtroom to Provide Identification Okay Under The Security Circumstances of the Case

State v. Cross, Minn.Ct.App., 9/8/2009.  Mr. Cross pled guilty to second degree murder.  There were bad feelings all around out in the gallery of the courtroom during the plea hearing, that spilled out into the hallway and streets.  The trial court decided that to discourage such behavior at the sentencing hearing those who entered the courtroom would have to identify themselves to deputies.  (Of course, if there were problems at the sentencing hearing the deputies would have a leg up in their investigation.)  Mr. Cross complained that this requirement violated his right to a public trial  even though no one who had wished to attend the sentencing hearing had been refused entry into the courtroom.  The trial court sentenced Mr. Cross in accordance with the plea agreement.

On appeal, Mr. Cross complained of this entrance drill.  The appellate court assumed without deciding that the Sixth Amendment right to a public trial applies at a sentencing hearing.  There was not, however, even a partial closure because the deputies did not exclude anyone who wanted to attend the sentencing hearing.  That one or more persons self excluded themselves in the face of the deputies and their identity inquires is also not a closure.  United States v. Shryock, 342 F.3d 948 (9th Cir. 2003).