288 P.3d 1126
Wash.2012Background
- Paumier was convicted of residential burglary and third degree theft in Mason County; on appeal he challenges voir dire and self‑representation rights.
- During voir dire, four potential jurors were privately questioned in chambers without a Bone-Club analysis.
- The judge offered privately questioning for sensitive matters; the private questioning was recorded and included health issues, criminal history, and familiarity with defendant or crime.
- Two of the privately questioned jurors were excused; the defense and prosecution participated and there were no objections.
- The Court of Appeals reversed on public-trial and self-representation grounds; the State sought review on both issues.
- The Supreme Court held the private in‑chambers questioning without Bone-Club analysis violated the public-trial right and required a new trial.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether a Bone‑Club analysis was required before in‑chambers voir dire. | Paumier asserts Bone‑Club analysis was mandatory before closure. | State contends the Bone‑Club factors need not be applied in this context. | Yes; Bone‑Club analysis required, failure structural error. |
| Whether the error is structural or subject to RAP 2.5 procedural bar. | Paumier argues the error is structural and warrants automatic reversal. | State argues it is not structural; RAP 2.5 applies and requires prejudice show. | Not structural if record shows no prejudice; RAP 2.5 may bar review without objection. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Bone-Club, 128 Wn.2d 254 (1995) ( Bone-Club analysis required for closure; five factors listed.)
- Wise, 176 Wn.2d 1 (2012) (private voir dire requires Bone-Club analysis; structural error absent prejudice shown.)
- Momah, 167 Wn.2d 140 (2009) (non‑structural public-trial violations may not be automatic reversible error.)
- Waller v. Georgia, 467 U.S. 39 (1984) (requires balancing before closing proceedings; guards public trial rights.)
- Presley v. Georgia, 558 U.S. 209 (2010) (courts must consider alternatives before closing court.)
- Easterling, 157 Wn.2d 167 (2006) (public-trial closures analyzed; consequences for reversal.)
- Orange, 152 Wn.2d 795 (2004) (public-trial closure factors and impact on fairness.)
- Momah, 167 Wn.2d 140 (2009) (establishes criteria for structural vs non-structural error in public trial.)
- Strode, 167 Wn.2d 222 (2009) (plurality on structural error; context matters.)
- Morris, 176 Wn.2d 157 (2012) (discussion of public-trial error and Bone-Club analysis.)