State-by-state guide:

Rhode Island

R.I. Gen. Laws § 14-1-30 (1998): The public is to be excluded from proceedings, but those with a direct interest in the case may be admitted.

R.I. Gen. Laws § 14-1-30 (1998): In general, the name and address of an alleged juvenile defendant cannot be released to the public. If the victim commences a civil action against the juvenile and/or his parents to recover for damages sustained as a result of the crime, the court will not allow the name and address of the juvenile accused of committing the crime to be divulged by the victim or the victim’s attorney to any other person until the civil action is commenced.

Statute is constitutional: The Rhode Island Supreme Court held that a statute that excludes public from juvenile proceedings is constitutional, but an order denying access because of newspaper’s publication of juvenile’s name is invalid. If the trial judge determines that the media learned of the juvenile’s name from nonjudicial sources, the media should be allowed to publish the name and attend the juvenile proceedings. However, if the trial judge determines that the media learned the name from a judicial source or from being present in family court, the court may order the media not to publish the juvenile’s name, and may also prohibit the media from attending the proceedings involving the juvenile, or future juvenile proceedings involving others. Edward A. Sherman Publishing Co. v. Goldberg, 443 A.2d 1252 (R.I. 1982).

Access granted: The Rhode Island Supreme Court unanimously struck down a lower court’s policy that sealed all court files in criminal cases involving child victims of sexual assault. The court held that releasing redacted documents was consistent with the legislative intent of a statute which protects minor victims of sex crimes from "further trauma and embarrassment." The court further observed that the presiding judge’s sweeping interpretation of the statute was inconsistent with the public’s First Amendment right of access to criminal trials, which is "beyond dispute." The court directed the trial judge to implement a new policy under which the Superior Court would maintain a "public" file and a "confidential" file. The public file would contain redacted documents in which the victim’s name is either obliterated or substituted by a fictitious name. Providence Journal Co. v. Rodgers, 711 A.2d 1131 (R.I. 1998).