3C3

3. Grand jury

3. Grand jury

None of the Idaho decisions has considered the assertion of a reporter's privilege in a grand jury context. However, as noted above, the Wright court specifically stated that the analysis of the privilege should be the same regardless of the case setting.

3. Grand jury

The privilege applies to Grand Jury subpoenas in the same manner as any other proceeding.

3. Grand jury

There is no authority expressly addressing subpoenas to reporters in grand jury proceedings, but Wisconsin courts likely would consider subpoenas issued by grand juries in the same manner as those in civil and other criminal proceedings. See generally Knops, 183 N.W.2d 93; Kurzynski, 538 N.W.2d 554.

3. Grand jury

Generally reporters in the Ninth Circuit are not entitled to a First Amendment privilege in refusing to testify before a federal grand jury regarding information received in confidence. See In re Grand Jury Proceedings (Scarce v. United States), 5 F.3d 397, 400 (9th Cir. 1993), cert. denied, 114 S. Ct. 685 (1994) (affirming a district court's judgment holding academic author in civil contempt pursuant to 28 U.S.C.

3. Grand jury

Although Illinois courts have not expressly set forth different standards for grand jury subpoenas relating to the Statute, some Illinois courts have found that grand jury proceedings implicate a compelling public interest that outweighs the public's interest in the privilege. See People v. Pawlaczyk, 189 Ill.2d 177; see also United States v. Jennings, No. 97 CR 765, 1999 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 9534 at *1 (N.D. Ill.

3. Grand jury

Rule 11-514 does not distinguish between grand-jury proceedings and other criminal proceedings.

3. Grand jury

Although there are no West Virginia cases directly on point addressing a reporter's privilege in the grand jury context, nevertheless, the Hudok court acknowledged that a reporter's privilege "will yield in proceedings before a grand jury where the reporter has personal knowledge or is aware of confidential sources that bear on the criminal investigation[.]" The Hudok court cited with approval the United States Supreme Court's decision in Branzburg v. Hayes, 408 U.S. 665, 92 S.Ct.

3. Grand jury

In an unpublished decision, the United States District Court for the District of Colorado quashed a grand jury subpoena that had been issued on an UPI reporter as part of a federal investigation to determine whether a particular Secret Service agent had "leaked" a photograph obtained from the home of John Hinckley's parents to the press. In re Grand Jury Subpoenas, 8 Media L. Rptr. (BNA) 1418, 1419 (D. Colo. 1982).

3. Grand jury

Indiana's shield law applies in "any legal proceedings or elsewhere." Ind. Code § 34-46-4-2. As stated above, the shield law applies to state matters only. Such limitation means that the shield law does not apply when a reporter is called before a federal grand jury.

There is no other source of privilege in a criminal case. The Indiana Supreme Court has rejected the notion that a qualified privilege exists under either the U.S. or state constitution in criminal cases. See In re WTHR-TV (State v. Cline), 693 N.E.2d 1 (Ind. 1998).

3. Grand jury

NRS 49.275 specifies that the privilege is applicable to grand jury proceedings. It should not be more difficult to defend against issuance of a subpoena in this context.