U.S. v. Al-Smadi, AL-SMADI
| Court | United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (10th Circuit) |
| Citation | 15 F.3d 153 |
| Docket Number | No. 93-2099,AL-SMADI,93-2099 |
| Parties | 22 Media L. Rep. 1319 UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Zuhair I.a/k/a, Sudgi Asad, Defendant-Appellant. |
| Decision Date | 24 January 1994 |
Page 153
v.
Zuhair I. AL-SMADI a/k/a, Sudgi Asad, Defendant-Appellant.
Tenth Circuit.
Page 154
Submitted on the Briefs: *
Stuart L. Stein, P.A., Santa Fe, NM, for defendant-appellant.
Larry Gomez, Acting U.S. Atty., and Robert J. Gorence, Asst. U.S. Atty., Albuquerque, NM, for plaintiff-appellee.
Before MOORE, ANDERSON and KELLY, Circuit Judges.
PAUL KELLY, Jr., Circuit Judge.
After normal working hours, the federal courthouse in Santa Fe, New Mexico is closed to the public. See generally 41 C.F.R. Sec. 101-20.302 (1993). Consistent with normal practice, this occurred at 4:30 p.m. during the second day of Mr. Al-Smadi's five-day trial for wire fraud, 18 U.S.C. Sec. 1343. The court security officers failed to keep the front doors of the courthouse open past 4:30 p.m., given that a trial was in progress. Defense counsel's wife and child were unable to gain access to the second-floor courtroom when they attempted to enter the courthouse after 4:30 p.m. At 4:50 p.m., the trial adjourned. Mr. Al-Smadi appeals the district court's denial of his motion for a mistrial on the grounds that the closing of the courthouse denied him his Sixth Amendment right to a public trial. See generally Waller v. Georgia, 467 U.S. 39, 44-46, 104 S.Ct. 2210, 2214-15, 81 L.Ed.2d 31 (1984); Davis v. Reynolds, 890 F.2d 1105, 1109 (10th Cir.1989). Our jurisdiction arises under 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1291 and we affirm.
The underlying facts concerning the closure as found by the district court will be accepted unless clearly erroneous; however, whether the closure violated the Sixth Amendment is a legal issue which we review de novo. See Nieto v. Sullivan, 879 F.2d 743, 749-54 (10th Cir.), cert. denied, 493 U.S. 957, 110 S.Ct. 373, 107 L.Ed.2d 359 (1989). Mr. Al-Smadi argues that, in the absence of a substantial reason to partially close his trial, see United States v. Galloway, 937 F.2d 542, 545-47 (10th Cir.1991), the district court could not merely reject his Sixth Amendment claim with the maxim de minimis non curat lex. Aplt. App. at 20.
The denial of a defendant's Sixth Amendment right to a public trial requires some affirmative act by the trial court meant to exclude persons from the courtroom. See People v. Peterson, 81 N.Y.2d 824, 595 N.Y.S.2d 383, 611 N.E.2d 284, 285 (1993); People v. Colon, 71 N.Y.2d 410, 526 N.Y.S.2d 932, ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Cassano v. Bradshaw, Case No. 1:03 CV 1206
...of proper courtroom closing not noticed by participants did not violate Sixth Amendment); United States v. Al-Smadi (C.A.10, 1994), 15 F.3d 153, 154-155. We reject proposition of law V.Cassano, 96 Ohio St. 3d at 104-05. Criminal defendants have the right under the Sixth Amendment to a publi......
-
State v. Brightman, No. 72919-1.
...of law, subject to de novo review on direct appeal. See Bone-Club, 128 Wash.2d at 256, 906 P.2d 325; see also United States v. Al-Smadi, 15 F.3d 153, 154 (10th In Bone-Club, without objection from the defendant, the trial court closed the courtroom during a pretrial suppression hearing that......
-
State v. Cassano, No. 1999-1268.
...of proper courtroom closing not noticed by participants did not violate Sixth Amendment); United States v. Al-Smadi (C.A.10, 1994), 15 F.3d 153, 154-155. We reject proposition of law Accused's Absence From Jury View {¶ 67} In proposition of law VI, Cassano argues that the trial court violat......
-
State v. Ndina, No. 2007AP5-CR.
..."a trial judge inadvertently left a courtroom closed for twenty minutes during which the defendant testified"); United States v. Al-Smadi, 15 F.3d 153, 154-55 (10th Cir.1994) (holding that when court security officers closed the courthouse to the public at 4:30 p.m. and the defendant's tria......
-
Mays v. Clark, No. CIV S-10-533 LKK CHS
...that the exclusion of a single excused juror from the trial did not implicate the right to a public trial); United States v. Al-Smadi, 15 F.3d 153, 154-55 (10th Cir. 1994) (applying Peterson to hold that the brief and inadvertent closure of the courtroom did not implicate the Sixth Amendmen......
-
Marcusse v. United States, File No. 1:09-CV-913
...trial unless there is some "affirmative act by the trial court meant to exclude persons from the courtroom." United States v. Al-Smadi, 15 F.3d 153, 154 (10th Cir. 1994). Here, there was no affirmative act of exclusion, for seating limitations alone do not create Sixth Amendment violations.......
-
In re Orange, 72485-7.
...of jurors about safety concerns was so trivial as not to implicate Sixth Amendment right to a public trial); United States v. Al-Smadi, 15 F.3d 153 (10th Cir.1994) (brief, inadvertent closing of courthouse during trial did not violate the Sixth Amendment right to a public Thus, the majority......
-
U.S. v. Lampley, s. 96-7074
...to the effect of the Oklahoma City bombing, we will review that court's constitutional findings de novo. United States v. Al-Smadi, 15 F.3d 153, 154 (10th Cir.1994) (citing Nieto v. Sullivan, 879 F.2d 743, 749-54 (10th Cir.)), cert. denied, 493 U.S. 957, 110 S.Ct. 373, 107 L.Ed.2d 359 B. De......
-
CLOSED COURTROOMS: SIXTH AMENDMENT AND PUBLIC TRIAL RIGHT IMPLICATIONS.
...(125.) Id. at 303-304. (126.) Id. at 304-305. (127.) Id. at 305. (128.) Id. at 305-06. (129.) Id. at 306; cf. United States v. Al-Smadi, 15 F.3d 153, 154 (10th Cir. 1994) ("The denial of a defendant's Sixth Amendment right to a public trial requires some affirmative act by the trial court m......
-
Courthouses must stay open when conducting trials after business hours, rules Wis. Court of Appeals.
...and what parts of the trial were closed." Turning to the merits, the court first rejected the State's argument, based on U.S. v. Al-Smadi, 15 F.3d 153 (10th Cir. 1994), that, because there was no affirmative act by the court to close its doors, Vanness should not receive a new trial. The co......