Other Free Encyclopedias » Law Library - American Law and Legal Information » Notable Trials and Court Cases - 1981 to 1988

Chandler v. Florida - Cameras In The Courtroom, Does The Constitution Forbid Televised Coverage Of Trials?, Impact, Televised Trials

defendant appellant lawyer justices


Noel Chandler


State of Florida

Appellant's Claim

Televising trials without approval from the defendant denies that individual his due process rights and guarantees an unfair trial.

Chief Lawyer for Appellant

Joel Hirschhorn

Chief Lawyer for Appellee

Jim Smith

Justices for the Court

Harry A. Blackmun, William J. Brennan, Jr., Warren E. Burger (writing for the Court), Thurgood Marshall, Lewis F. Powell, Jr., William H. Rehnquist, Potter Stewart, Byron R. White

Justices Dissenting

None (John Paul Stevens did not participate)


Washington, D.C.

Date of Decision

26 January 1981


Affirmed a Florida court's ruling that televising trials did not infringe upon the defendant's right to a fair and impartial trial.


Reinterpreted the Court's ruling in Estes v. Texas (1964), and paved the way for live television coverage of trials without fear of infringing on the defendant's or victim's right to privacy.

Related Cases

  • Estes v. Texas, 381 U.S. 532 (1964).
  • Sheppard v. Maxwell, 384 U.S. 333 (1966).
  • Furman v. Georgia, 408 U.S. 238 (1972).
  • Murphy v. Florida, 421 U.S. 794 (1975).
  • Nixon v. Warner Communications Inc, 435 U.S. 589 (1978).


Kiska, Tim. "O. J.'s Pandering Lawyers Jeopardize Future of Cameras in the Courtroom." Detroit News, 5 October 1995.

Charles Harrelson Trial: 1982-83 - Chagra Testifies For Prosecution, Harrelson Alleges Complicated Set-up, Verdicts And Convictions, Harrelson's Son Funds Appeal [next] [back] California v. Greenwood - Significance, A Reasonable Expectation Of Privacy, Should The Fourth Amendment Protect Garbage?, Impact

User Comments

Your email address will be altered so spam harvesting bots can't read it easily.
Hide my email completely instead?

Cancel or