State-by-state guide:

California

Cal. Welf. & Inst. Code § 346 (1999): The court is authorized to admit the public to juvenile dependency proceedings unless there is a reasonable likelihood that access will harm the best interests of the child. The court should consider allowing press access to portions of the proceeding. See San Bernardino County Dept. of Public Social Services v. Superior Court, 232 Cal. App. 3d 188 (1991) (holding that the First Amendment right of access to court proceedings did not apply to juvenile dependency proceedings).

Cal. Welf. & Inst. Code § 389 (1999): The court may seal court records at the juvenile’s request after a hearing if he has not been convicted of a felony or misdemeanor involving "moral turpitude." The records can be opened in defamation suits. The court shall order the destruction of the sealed juvenile court record five years after a juvenile court record has been sealed, unless good cause exists that the juvenile court record shall be retained.

Cal. Welf. & Inst. Code § 676 (1999): Unless the juvenile requests a public hearing, the public has no right of access to juvenile court hearings. The court may admit those it decides have a "direct and legitimate" interest in the case. However, the public has a right of access to cases involving charges of violent crimes, including carjacking, drive-by shooting and felony criminal street gang activity.

Cal. Welf. & Inst. Code § 827 (1999): Juvenile court records can only be viewed by court personnel, the minor, his parents and other persons designated by court order. Dissemination of the records by these persons to others is forbidden. But see In re Keisha T., 38 Cal. App. 4th 220 (1995) (holding that § 827 does not limit the other persons who may obtain access to juvenile court records by court order).

Cal. Welf. & Inst. Code § 828 (1999): Information gathered by a law enforcement agency relating to the taking of a minor into custody may be disclosed to another law enforcement agency, including a school district police or security department, or to any person or agency which has a legitimate need for the information.

Cal. Welf. & Inst. Code § 827.5 (1999): A law enforcement agency may disclose the name of any minor at least 14 years old who has been charged with a serious felony under Cal. Penal Code § 1197.7.

Cal. Welf. & Inst. Code § 781 (1999): The records of a juvenile who was 16 years of age or older at the time he or she committed any criminal offense listed in § 707 shall not be destroyed.

Cal. Welf. & Inst. Code § 707 (1999): With regard to a minor 16 years of age or older who commits any enumerated offense, the probation officer to investigate and submit a report on the behavioral patterns and social history of the minor being considered for a determination of unfitness. The enumerate offenses include following: murder, arson, robbery while armed with a dangerous or deadly weapon, rape with force or violence or threat of great bodily harm, and sodomy by force, violence, duress, menace, or threat of great bodily harm.

California Court Rule § 1423(b) (1999): Only those persons specified in § 827 and § 828 may inspect juvenile court records without authorization from the court. Juvenile court records may not be obtained or inspected by civil or criminal subpoena. Authorization for any other person to inspect, obtain, or copy juvenile court records must be ordered by the juvenile court. In determining whether to release juvenile court records, the court must balance the interests of the child and other parties to the juvenile court proceedings, the interests of the petitioner, and the interests of the public. The court shall permit disclosure of juvenile court records or proceedings only insofar as is necessary, and "only if there is a reasonable likelihood that the records in question will disclose information or evidence of substantial relevance to the pending litigation, investigation, or prosecution."

Detention hearing: The California Court of Appeal held that media have a right to attend the detention hearing of a minor charged with murder because murder is an offense designated under § 676. The court held that the juvenile court violated the media’s First Amendment rights by prohibiting dissemination of information lawfully obtained at the hearing. KGTV Channel 10 v. Superior Ct., 26 Cal. App. 4th 1673 (1994).

Access granted: The Court of Appeals held that if a juvenile court determines, consistent with the best interests of the minors, that records should be released to the press, the public can thereafter learn the content of the disclosed records. The court found that § 827 does not limit the other persons who may obtain access to juvenile court records by court order. In re Keisha T., 38 Cal. App. 4th 220 (1995).

Access granted: The disclosure to the news media of juvenile case information acquired by the district attorney’s office independently of the documents deemed confidential under provisions § 827, would be unlawful absent a juvenile court order permitting such disclosure. However, where the juvenile proceedings are open to the public generally, the district attorney may furnish the news media with whatever information is available to the public at those proceedings in which he participates unless the juvenile court has placed restrictions on such dissemination. 65 Op. Att’y. Gen. Cal. 503 (1982).

Detention hearing: A juvenile murder defendant’s motion to exclude the press and public from a detention hearing was denied based on evidence showing that the case has already received extensive media coverage, including publication of the juvenile’s name and photograph and that public interest in this case is high. In re Gjevre, 5 Media L. Rep. 2329 (Cal. Super. Ct. 1980).

Competency hearing: A minor cannot exclude the public from her competency hearing held in juvenile court for a murder charge because she failed to show a reasonable likelihood of substantial prejudice to her right to a fair trial with an impartial jury. Cheyenne K. v. Superior Ct., 208 Cal. App. 3d 311 (1989).

Competency hearing: A trial court’s order allowing news media into competency hearing of juvenile charged with kidnaping and murder is valid because court has discretionary authority to admit persons who have a "direct and legitimate interest in the particular case" and because juvenile failed to show there was a reasonable likelihood that his fair trial rights would be compromised. Brian W. v. Superior Ct., 143 Cal. Rptr. 717, 574 P.2d 788 (1978).