California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Spring, 153 Cal.App.3d 1199, 200 Cal.Rptr. 849 (Cal. App. 1984):
Spring's Sixth Amendment argument is similarly meritless. "To demonstrate prejudice in a specific case a defendant must show something more than juror awareness that the trial is such as to attract the attention of broadcasters. [Citation.] No doubt the very presence of a camera in the courtroom made the jurors aware that the trial was thought to be of sufficient interest to the public to warrant coverage.... But the [defendant has] not attempted to show with any specificity that the presence of cameras impaired [153 Cal.App.3d 1208] the ability of the jurors to decide the case on only the evidence before them or that [his] trial was affected adversely by the impact on any of the participants of the presence of cameras and the prospect of broadcast." (Chandler v. Florida (1981) 449 U.S. 560, 581, 101 S.Ct. 802, 813, 69 L.Ed.2d 740.)
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.