257 P.3d 624
Wash.2011Background
- Lormor was charged with unlawful possession of a controlled substance after a bag of methamphetamine residue was found on arrest.
- Lormor’s four-year-old daughter, who is terminally ill, was excluded from the courtroom before trial due to concerns about disruption and the ventilator noise.
- The judge stated the exclusion was to avoid distraction and did not imply a general prohibition on spectators.
- Lormor was convicted and later allowed to accompany his daughter Disneyland before serving sentence.
- On appeal, Lormor argued the exclusion violated the public-trial right and that counsel was ineffective for failing to object; the Court of Appeals disagreed, treating the exclusion as a non-closure and potentially trivial under federal precedent.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Did exclusion of a spectator amount to a closure under public-trial rights? | Lormor | Lormor | No closure; exclusion deemed a courtroom-management action. |
| Was there ineffective assistance of counsel for failing to object? | Lormor | Lormor | Ineffective-assistance claim rejected because no closure occurred. |
Key Cases Cited
- Bone-Club v. Allied Daily Newspapers, 128 Wash.2d 254 (1995) (standards for determining closure factors; required findings)
- Waller v. Georgia, 467 U.S. 39 (1984) (closure standards and alternatives before closing proceedings)
- Presley v. Georgia, 130 S. Ct. 721 (2010) (requires consideration of reasonable alternatives to closure; public attendance)
- In re Pers. Restraint of Orange, 152 Wash.2d 795 (2004) (necessity and scope of restrictions on spectators; not all diary-like closures justify exclusion)