Oklahoma

Delinquency proceedings: Juvenile delinquency proceedings are held in private in Oklahoma unless the court specifically orders that they be conducted in public. But hearings related to the second or subsequent delinquency adjudication of a child are public, although the court still may, by request of a party or on its own, for good cause order that specific testimony or evidence be heard in private. In this context, good cause means a showing that it would be substantially harmful to the mental or physical well-being of the child is such testimony or evidence were presented at a public hearing. Okla. Stat. Ann. tit. 10A, § 2-2-402 (West 2012).

Dependency proceedings: A proceeding to determine whether a child is deprived and whether parental rights should be terminated is generally held in private unless the court specifically orders that it be conducted in public. Id. § 1-4-503.

Delinquency records: Delinquency records are confidential and not available for public inspection without a court order entered after the court determines that a compelling reason for inspection, release or disclosure of the confidential records exists and such disclosure is necessary for the protection of a legitimate public or private interest. But several exceptions exist, and this general rule of confidentiality does not apply to juvenile court and law enforcement records in delinquency cases, among others, where: 1) a juvenile is tried as an adult for a serious criminal offense; 2) a juvenile who is 14 years old or older who previously has been adjudicated delinquent comes before the court on a new delinquency matter; and 3) a juvenile has been adjudicated delinquent for committing an act that would be a felony if committed by an adult. In addition, the name and description of a delinquent child who has escaped or run away from an institution may be publicly released as necessary and appropriate for the protection of the public and apprehension of the juvenile. Id. § 2-6-102. Interpreting this statute, the state Supreme Court found that an adult defendant’s juvenile court and law enforcement records, which were exempt from the general confidentiality requirements applicable to juvenile court records, were not automatically open to the newspaper that requested them but were subject to the procedural provisions of the statute mandating judicial review and approval prior to their release. World Publ’g Co. v. Miller, 32 P.3d 829, 833 (Okla. 2001).

Dependency records: Dependency records are confidential and not available for public inspection without a court order. Okla. Stat. Ann. tit. 10A, § 1-6-102. But when a person responsible for a child has been charged with committing a crime resulting in the death or near death of the child, there is a presumption that the best interest of the public is served by public disclosure of certain information related to the investigation of the death or near death and any other investigations concerning that child or other children living in the house. This information, released by state officials seven days after the person is charged, includes a summary of previous reports of child abuse or neglect of the victim or other children living in the house, the dates and outcomes of such investigations, actions taken by the state Department of Human Services or district attorney in response and specific recommendations made and services rendered by the agency in a pending case involving the victim if reports containing that information have been submitted to the court. But this information will not identify any reporter of child abuse or neglect, the child victim’s siblings or other children living in the house or any other member of the household other than the person charged. Id. § 1-6-105.

Restrictions on coverage: Oklahoma law allows child witnesses 12 years old or younger to testify in a criminal or noncriminal proceeding by an alternative method to in-court testimony. The statute does not specify whether the media and public may be present when this testimony is given via the alternative method, which also is not specified in the law. Id. tit. 12, §§ 2611.4, 2611.6. Closing a trial to the media and general public during the testimony of 13-, 14- and 15-year-old sexual offense victims was a narrowly tailored means of accommodating the state’s interest in safeguarding the physical and psychological well-being of minor victims and sufficiently protected the defendant’s right to a public trial. Reeves v. State, 818 P.2d 495, 498—99 (Okla. Crim. App. 1991). Davis v. State, 728 P.2d 846, 848 (Okla. Crim. App. 1986) (involving partial closure of the courtroom during the testimony of a 16-year-old sexual assault victim).