Presley v. Georgia

Background

Eric Presley was tried and convicted in DeKalb County, Georgia, on a cocaine trafficking charge. During jury selection the trial judge ordered the lone courtroom observer, Presley’s uncle, to leave because jurors were about to enter and there was claimed to be no space for the public. Presley objected, later showed evidence that seating could have accommodated the public, and the Georgia courts upheld the exclusion, prompting Presley to ask the Supreme Court to review the ruling.

Reasoning

The Court addressed whether the defendant’s Sixth Amendment right to a public trial (the right of an accused to have the public present) covers the jury selection stage and whether a judge must consider alternatives before excluding the public. Relying on earlier First and Sixth Amendment decisions, the Court held that the right extends to voir dire and that trial courts must consider reasonable, less-intrusive alternatives to closure even if no party suggests them. Because the Georgia trial judge did not consider alternatives and offered only a general space concern, the Supreme Court reversed the state court judgment.

Real world impact

Going forward, judges must take steps to accommodate public attendance at jury selection and explain any specific, overriding interest before closing the courtroom. The decision affects defendants, their families, the press, and court administrators who will need to plan seating and procedures to allow public access when possible. The Court reversed and remanded the case for further proceedings consistent with this ruling.

Dissents or concurrances

A dissent argued the Court should not have decided these important questions without full briefing and oral argument, warning that the Court expanded the law by summary decision.