3C3

3. Grand jury

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.

3. Grand jury

Wyoming has no statutory or reported court decisions involving reporter's privilege in regard to grand jury testimony.

3. Grand jury

In Miller v. Transamerican Press, Inc., the court refers to the Branzburg decision, and points to the fact that the decision was based on whether reporters could be compelled to testify in grand jury proceedings. While the Miller court did not disagree that the reporter's privilege could apply in grand jury proceedings, it did, however, determine that in libel cases there is a stronger interest in protecting confidentiality of journalist's sources as opposed to the need for protection in grand jury proceedings.

3. Grand jury

There is no statutory or case law addressing this issue in the state courts. (Note: grand juries are rarely convened under Kansas law. A somewhat-similar procedure journalists are more likely to encounter in the state courts is the prosecutorial "inquisition." See K.S.A. 22-3101, et seq. An inquisition is essentially a discovery proceeding, in which the district attorney is authorized to issue subpoenas for testimony under oath regarding alleged violations of state law. There is no case law discussing the privilege in the context of an inquisition.)

3. Grand jury

Civil Rights Law § 79-h applies, on its face, to grand jury subpoenas. See Civil Rights Law § 79-h (b), (c) ("nor shall a grand jury seek to have a journalist or newscaster held in contempt by any court"). As the Court of Appeals has stated, the constitutional provision proscribing laws which suspend or impair a grand jury's investigative power was "not intended to prevent the Legislature from creating evidentiary privileges or their equivalent that have an incidental impact on investigations." Beach, 62 N.Y.2d at 252.

3. Grand jury

Alaska appellate courts have not had occasion to squarely address the existence or scope of a reporter's privilege. Given the nature of grand jury proceedings, and particularly the fact the cases consolidated in Branzburg all arose from a grand jury setting, it is predictable that courts might be more likely to enforce a subpoena in this context. However, anecdotal experience indicates that courts are willing to recognize a reporter's privilege, and apply the normal tests to quash a subpoena where the circumstances warrant.

3. Grand jury

There is no statutory or case law in Alabama that addresses the standards for asserting the reporter's privilege to overcome a grand jury subpoena.

3. Grand jury

Under the Louisiana shield law, a grand jury may not serve a subpoena upon a reporter unless the prosecutor has certified in writing that the information sought by the subpoena is "highly material and relevant; bears directly on the guilt or innocence of the accused; and is not obtainable from any alternative source." La. R.S. 45:1459(D)(1). A reporter may assert a qualified privilege and refuse to answer questions before a grand jury unless the reporter has witnessed criminal activity or has physical evidence of a crime. Ridenhour, 520 So.2d at 376.