Thornton v. State, 90-02863
| Decision Date | 20 September 1991 |
| Docket Number | No. 90-02863,90-02863 |
| Citation | 585 So.2d 1189 |
| Parties | Fred THORNTON, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee. 585 So.2d 1189, 16 Fla. L. Week. D2475 |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
James Marion Moorman, Public Defender, and Tonja R. Vickers, Asst. Public Defender, for appellant.
Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Michele Taylor, Asst. Atty. Gen., Tampa, for appellee.
The appellant, Fred Thornton, challenges the judgment and sentence imposed upon him after a jury found him guilty of committing an attempted lewd or lascivious act in the presence of a child. We reverse.
During the trial, the trial court, without any party requesting it, cleared the courtroom of all spectators while the minor victim testified. The appellant objected on the ground that clearing the courtroom would deny him the right to a public trial.
Section 918.16, Florida Statutes (1989), provides that in a trial when any person under the age of sixteen is testifying concerning any sex offense, the court shall clear the courtroom of all persons except several enumerated individuals. This court in Pritchett v. State, 566 So.2d 6 (Fla. 2d DCA), review dismissed, 570 So.2d 1306 (Fla.1990), held that before a trial court orders closure it must satisfy the four prerequisites enunciated in Waller v. Georgia, 467 U.S. 39, 104 S.Ct. 2210, 81 L.Ed.2d 31 (1984). First, the party seeking to close the hearing must advance an overriding interest that is likely to be prejudiced; second, the closure must be no broader than necessary to protect that interest; third, the trial court must consider reasonable alternatives to closing the proceedings, and fourth, the court must make findings adequate to support the closure. Waller.
The trial court in this case failed to apply the Waller prerequisites and apparently did not adhere to section 918.16 when it cleared the courtroom of even those individuals authorized under the statute to be present. This was error and requires reversal for a new trial. Pritchett; see Wheeler v. State, 344 So.2d 244 (Fla.1977). We reverse the judgment and sentence and remand for a new trial.
Reversed and remanded.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Clements v. State, 98-963.
...Clements asserts that Pritchett v. State, 566 So.2d 6 (Fla. 2d DCA), review dismissed, 570 So.2d 1306 (Fla.1990) and Thornton v. State, 585 So.2d 1189 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991) mandate reversal. In Pritchett, the trial court cleared the courtroom of all spectators, without any analysis whether com......
-
Roberts v. State, 2D00-3872.
...the courtroom. We agree that these errors require reversal. See Whitson v. State, 791 So.2d 544 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001); Thornton v. State, 585 So.2d 1189 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991); Pritchett v. State, 566 So.2d 6 (Fla. 2d DCA Section 918.16(1), Florida Statutes (2000), provides that when any person un......
-
Clements v. State, SC96670.
...of appeal in Clements v. State, 742 So.2d 338 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999), on the basis of express and direct conflict with Thornton v. State, 585 So.2d 1189 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991), and Pritchett v. State, 566 So.2d 6 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990). Upon further consideration, we determine that jurisdiction was im......
-
Scaling Waller: How Courts Have Eroded the Sixth Amendment Public Trial Right
...Id. at 604-06.320. Id. at 602 (citation omitted); see also supra Part IV.D.321. Clements, 742 So. 2d at 341. Contra Thornton v. State, 585 So. 2d 1189 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App.-2d 1991) (per curiam) (holding as improper the failure to apply Waller prerequisites before closing the courtroom to ev......
-
Daniel Levitas, Scaling Waller: How Courts Have Eroded the Sixth Amendment Public Trial Right
...Id. at 604-06. 320 Id. at 602 (citation omitted); see also supra Part IV.D. 321 Clements, 742 So. 2d at 341. Contra Thornton v. State, 585 So. 2d 1189 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App.-2d 1991) (per curiam) (holding as improper the failure to apply Waller prerequisites before closing the courtroom to ev......