About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

4 Trial Judges J. 1 (1965)

handle is hein.journals/judgej4 and id is 1 raw text is: 8 8 0 0- 0- 0 0 0 8 - - 8 0 - 0 0 PRE-SENTENCE INVESTIGATION REPORTS: PUBLIC, PRIVATE OR CONFIDENTIAL? By JUDGE THEODORE B. KNUDSON* District Court, Minneapolis Many members of the bench and bar are against any disclosure of pre-sentence reports. One reason for this attitude may be that expressed in People v. Riley, 33 N.E. (2) 872, where the Illinois court said of the convicted defendants: After a plea of guilty . . . instead of being clothed with a presumption of innocence, they are naked criminals, hoping for mercy but entitled only to justice. Also, there is the almost universal argument by pro- bation officers that they would be unable to insure in- formants that their identities or information disclosed would be withheld from the defendant. Unless confiden- tiality can be insured, sources of information may dry up, because in some cases the source of information is ob- vious, as where only close relatives could have given the information, and some- times sources are afraid of Judge Theodore B. Knudson retaliation from the defen- dant or his friends. For these and other reasons the ban on disclosure has been accepted in most jurisdictions. Some jurisdictions have been unwilling to accept the ban. The judges vary in their practices regarding dis- closure. Some allow only counsel to see the reports; some do not allow the reports to be seen in all cases; and some make the reports available, while concealing the identity of some of the informants. Rule 32(c) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure gives the court discretion to disclose information in the pre-sentence report, and the following states give access to the report or give the defendant or his counsel the right to see it: Arizona, California, Idaho, Minnesota, Montana, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Oregon, Utah, Connecticut, and Alabama. Only Kentucky specifically denies the right of access. Section 4 of the Model Sentencing Act provides that the judge may make the investigation report available to the defendant or others, and may conceal the identity of those who provided confidential information. Where the defendant is to be sentenced for murder or as a dangerous offender, the judge shall make the report available to counsel and the defendant, and the defendant shall be * Member of faculty, NCSTJ. (Continued on page 7) THE BENCH LOOKS AT THE FREE PRESS-FAIR TRIAL ISSUE By JUDGE GERALD S. LEVIN Superior Court, San Francisco News coverage of recent criminal cases of national significance, such as the trial of Jack Ruby in Dallas, Texas, has underscored the importance of cooperative effort of bench, bar and news media in resolving serious conflicts between freedom of the press provided for in Article I, and fair trial in all criminal prosecutions pro- vided for in Article VI of the Bill of Rights. Membership of judges on a committee of bench, bar and news media, organized to adjust differences in viewpoints regarding the publication of news of the arrest of the accused and trial proceedings, would be in the interests of the ad- ministration of justice and would reflect credit upon the judiciary. Representatives of the press and bar recognize that they also have an equal responsibility to preserve inviolate the safeguards of a fair trial and at the same time to uphold the freedom of the press. There have been demands for voluntary action, gov- ernment regulation, legislation, court rules and other mea- sures to properly balance our concept of freedom of the press and fair trial. As a result of the activity of repre- sentatives of the bench, bar, news media and the public, progressive action has been taken that forecasts greater order in the future. Perhaps foremost among the cooperative endeavors to reach a fair solution of the problem are the Massa- chusetts Guide for the Bar and News Media, and the Oregon Bar Press Broadcasters Joint Statement of Principles. The Massachusetts Guide was prepared by a special bar-press committee established in the fall of (Continued on page 5) EXTRA COPIES OF JOURNAL AVAILABLE Additional copies of this issue of the Journal will be available to those desiring them in quantities up to 50 copies as long as the supply lasts. Requests for addi- tional copies will be filled in order of their receipt at the Chicago office. David R. Kochery, Executive for the Section of Judi- cial Administration reports that the possibility of fur- nishing reprints of articles that appear in the Journal is now being explored. Requests for extra copies should be addressed to: National Conference of State Trial Judges American Bar Association 1155 East 60th Street Chicago, Illinois 60637

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Purchase Access

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most