{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\uc1\deff37\stshfdbch0\stshfloch0\stshfhich0\stshfbi0\deflang1033\deflangfe1033{\fonttbl{\f0\froman\fcharset0\fprq2{\*\panose 02020603050405020304}Times New Roman{\*\falt Times New Roman};}
{\f36\fnil\fcharset0\fprq2{\*\panose 00000400000000000000}WP TypographicSymbols;}{\f37\froman\fcharset0\fprq2 Times New Roman TUR;}{\f172\froman\fcharset238\fprq2 Times New Roman CE{\*\falt Times New Roman};}
{\f173\froman\fcharset204\fprq2 Times New Roman Cyr{\*\falt Times New Roman};}{\f175\froman\fcharset161\fprq2 Times New Roman Greek{\*\falt Times New Roman};}{\f176\froman\fcharset162\fprq2 Times New Roman Tur{\*\falt Times New Roman};}
{\f177\froman\fcharset177\fprq2 Times New Roman (Hebrew){\*\falt Times New Roman};}{\f178\froman\fcharset178\fprq2 Times New Roman (Arabic){\*\falt Times New Roman};}{\f179\froman\fcharset186\fprq2 Times New Roman Baltic{\*\falt Times New Roman};}
{\f180\froman\fcharset163\fprq2 Times New Roman (Vietnamese){\*\falt Times New Roman};}{\f542\froman\fcharset238\fprq2 Times New Roman TUR CE;}{\f543\froman\fcharset204\fprq2 Times New Roman TUR Cyr;}
{\f545\froman\fcharset161\fprq2 Times New Roman TUR Greek;}{\f546\froman\fcharset162\fprq2 Times New Roman TUR Tur;}{\f547\froman\fcharset177\fprq2 Times New Roman TUR (Hebrew);}{\f548\froman\fcharset178\fprq2 Times New Roman TUR (Arabic);}
{\f549\froman\fcharset186\fprq2 Times New Roman TUR Baltic;}{\f550\froman\fcharset163\fprq2 Times New Roman TUR (Vietnamese);}}{\colortbl;\red0\green0\blue0;\red0\green0\blue255;\red0\green255\blue255;\red0\green255\blue0;\red255\green0\blue255;
\red255\green0\blue0;\red255\green255\blue0;\red255\green255\blue255;\red0\green0\blue128;\red0\green128\blue128;\red0\green128\blue0;\red128\green0\blue128;\red128\green0\blue0;\red128\green128\blue0;\red128\green128\blue128;\red192\green192\blue192;}
{\stylesheet{\ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \f37\fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext0 Normal;}{\*\cs10 \additive \ssemihidden Default Paragraph Font;}{\*
\ts11\tsrowd\trftsWidthB3\trpaddl108\trpaddr108\trpaddfl3\trpaddft3\trpaddfb3\trpaddfr3\trcbpat1\trcfpat1\tscellwidthfts0\tsvertalt\tsbrdrt\tsbrdrl\tsbrdrb\tsbrdrr\tsbrdrdgl\tsbrdrdgr\tsbrdrh\tsbrdrv 
\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs20\lang1024\langfe1024\cgrid\langnp1024\langfenp1024 \snext11 \ssemihidden Normal Table;}{\*\cs15 \additive \sbasedon10 \ssemihidden footnote reference;}}{\*\rsidtbl \rsid2695382
\rsid8338470\rsid8466058\rsid9508377\rsid9973372}{\*\generator Microsoft Word 10.0.6764;}{\info{\author lroberto}{\operator blake_r}{\creatim\yr2005\mo8\dy12\hr9\min1}{\revtim\yr2006\mo3\dy22\hr14\min10}{\version4}{\edmins4}{\nofpages8}{\nofwords2048}
{\nofchars11679}{\*\company Superior Court of Guam}{\nofcharsws13700}{\vern16391}}\margl2160\margr2160\margt2606\margb2606 
\widowctrl\ftnbj\aenddoc\notabind\wraptrsp\transmf\noxlattoyen\expshrtn\noultrlspc\dntblnsbdb\nospaceforul\truncatefontheight\subfontbysize\sprsbsp\wpjst\lytprtmet\hyphcaps0\horzdoc\dghspace120\dgvspace120\dghorigin1701\dgvorigin1984\dghshow0\dgvshow3
\jcompress\viewkind4\viewscale100\nolnhtadjtbl\rsidroot8338470 \fet0{\*\ftnsep \pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \f37\fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\insrsid8338470 \chftnsep 
\par }}{\*\ftnsepc \pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \f37\fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\insrsid8338470 \chftnsepc 
\par }}{\*\aftnsep \pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \f37\fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\insrsid8338470 \chftnsep 
\par }}{\*\aftnsepc \pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \f37\fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\insrsid8338470 \chftnsepc 
\par }}\sectd \sbknone\linex0\headery2606\footery2606\sectdefaultcl\sectrsid8338470\sftnbj {\header \pard\plain \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tqc\tx3960\tx4320\tx4752\tx5184\tx5616\tx6048\tx6480\tx6912\tx7344\tx7776\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 
\f37\fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\b\fs18\insrsid8338470 \tab Guam Publications vs. Superior Court vs. People, 1996 Guam 6, (Opinion)
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\sl-240\slmult0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 {\b\fs18\insrsid8338470 
\par }}{\*\pnseclvl1\pnucrm\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxta .}}{\*\pnseclvl2\pnucltr\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxta .}}{\*\pnseclvl3\pndec\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxta .}}{\*\pnseclvl4\pnlcltr\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxta )}}
{\*\pnseclvl5\pndec\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}{\*\pnseclvl6\pnlcltr\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}{\*\pnseclvl7\pnlcrm\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}{\*\pnseclvl8
\pnlcltr\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}{\*\pnseclvl9\pnlcrm\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}\pard\plain \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid8466058 
\f37\fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\b\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF GUAM
\par TERRITORY OF GUAM}{\b\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid8466058 {\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid8466058 {\b\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 GUAM PUBLICATIONS, INC.}{\b\f0\insrsid8466058  }{\f0\insrsid2695382 a}{\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid2695382 
\par }{\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 Guam Corporation
\par Petitioner,
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid8466058 {\f0\insrsid8466058 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid8466058 {\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 vs.}{\f0\insrsid8338470 
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid8466058 {\f0\insrsid8466058\charrsid8466058 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid8466058 {\b\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 SUPERIOR COURT OF GUAM
\par }{\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 Respondent,
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid8466058 {\f0\insrsid8466058 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid8466058 {\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 vs.}{\f0\insrsid8338470 
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid8466058 {\f0\insrsid8466058\charrsid8466058 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid8466058 {\b\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 PEOPLE OF THE TERRITORY OF GUAM
\par and BEAU BRUNEMAN,
\par }{\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 Real Parties in Interest.
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid8466058 {\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid8466058 {\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 Case No. WRM 96-001
\par Filed:}{\f0\insrsid8466058\charrsid8466058  }{\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 October 29, 1996}{\f0\insrsid8338470 
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid8466058 {\f0\insrsid8466058\charrsid8466058 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid8466058 {\b\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 Cite as:}{\b\f0\insrsid8466058  }{\b\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 1996 Guam 6
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid8466058 {\f0\insrsid8466058 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid8466058 {\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 Petition for Writ of Mandamus and for Declaratory Relief
\par Argued and Submitted on October 16, 1996
\par Agana, Guam
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid8466058 {\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 
\par }{\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 Attorney for the Petitioner
\par PHILIP D. ISAAC
\par Carlsmith Ball Wichman Case & Ichiki
\par 134 West Soledad Avenue
\par Bank of Hawaii Bldg., Suite 401
\par P.O. Box BF
\par Agana, Guam}{\f0\insrsid8466058\charrsid8466058  }{\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 96932-5027}{\f0\insrsid8466058\charrsid8466058 
\par 
\par }{\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 Attorneys for the Real Parties-in-Interest
\par CALVIN E. HOLLOWAY, SR.
\par Attorney General
\par BONNIE K. BRADY
\par }{\f0\insrsid2695382 Assistant Attorney General}{\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 
\par Office of the Attorney General
\par Prosecution Division
\par Suite 2-200E, Judicial Center Bldg.
\par 120 West O'Brien Drive
\par Agana, Guam}{\f0\insrsid8466058\charrsid8466058  }{\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 96910
\par 
\par D. PAUL VERNIER
\par }{\f0\insrsid2695382 Attorney for Defendant}{\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 
\par Vernier Law Office
\par Suite 804, GCIC Bldg.
\par 414 West Soledad Avenue
\par Agana, Guam 96910
\par 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid8466058 {\b\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 OPINION
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid8466058 {\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 
\par BEFORE: PETER C. SIGUENZA, Jr., Chief Justice, JANET HEALY WEEKS, and MONESSA G. LUJAN, Associate Justices.
\par 
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 SIGUENZA, C.J.:
\par }{\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 
\par [1]\tab Guam Publications, Inc., the publisher of the Pacific Daily News (the "PDN"), petitions this Court for a writ of mandamus directing the inferior court to cease closure of proceedings except for good cause.}{\f0\insrsid8466058\charrsid8466058  }{
\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 The Real Parties in Interest, the People of the Territory of Guam (the "People") and Beau Bruneman (the "Defendant"), oppose petitioner's request for relief.}{\f0\insrsid8466058\charrsid8466058  }{
\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 
\par 
\par [2]\tab The PDN contends that because the press has a qualified right to attend criminal proceedings, closure of a pre-trial conference without notice to the press and the opportunity to object was improper.}{\f0\insrsid8466058\charrsid8466058  }{
\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 Petitioner further asserts that procedures are needed to guide the lower courts in future cases.}{\f0\insrsid8466058\charrsid8466058  }{\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 We agree.}{\f0\insrsid8466058\charrsid8466058  }{
\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 Accordingly, we grant the writ of mandamus and remand with directions.
\par 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid8466058 {\b\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid8466058 {\f0\insrsid8466058\charrsid8466058 
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid8466058 {\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 [3]\tab The defendant, Beau Bruneman, is charged with Aggravated Mur
der, Aggravated Felony Murder, and two counts of Criminal Sexual Conduct in Superior Court cases CF0081-96 and CF0218-96.
\par 
\par [4]\tab The following facts are not disputed by the parties.}{\f0\insrsid8466058\charrsid8466058  }{\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 On August 22, 1996, these cases were docketed at 3:00 PM for pre-trial confer
ences before Judge Alberto C. Lamorena, III.}{\f0\insrsid8466058\charrsid8466058  }{\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 The docket did not indicate the hearing was closed to either the public or press nor did it indicate a motion for closure was scheduled.
}{\f0\insrsid8466058\charrsid8466058  }{\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 At the call of the case, attorneys for both the People and Defendant approached the bench for a private conference with the trial judge.}{\f0\insrsid8466058\charrsid8466058  }{
\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 The conversation was not audible by others present in the courtroom, including the reporter employed by the PDN.}{\f0\insrsid8466058\charrsid8466058  }{\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 
The sidebar conference was then moved and continued to the court's chambers.}{\f0\insrsid8466058\charrsid8466058  }{\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 This relocation was neither announced nor explained to those present in the courtroom.}{
\f0\insrsid8466058\charrsid8466058  }{\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 After concluding the chamber discussion, the judge did not return to the bench nor did he provide subsequent findings as to why the hearing required closure.}{
\f0\insrsid8466058\charrsid8466058  }{\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 In addition, petitioner was not given access to the recording of the bench conference and learned that "no audible tape, if tape at all"}{\f0\insrsid8466058\charrsid8466058  }{
\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 was available for review. 
\par 
\par [5]\tab Based on the brief submitted by the People, both discovery and evidentiary matters were discussed at the bench conference and in chambers.}{\f0\insrsid8466058\charrsid8466058  }{\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 
Specifically, the People represent that preliminary findings of scientific tests conducted on physical evidence were provided to defense counsel under seal.
\par 
\par [6]\tab Although present in the courtroom, the PDN reporter made no objection to the bench conference or later when the discussion was moved to the court's chambers.}{\f0\insrsid8466058\charrsid8466058  }{\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 
The PDN asserts that under the circumstances of the hearing, the opportunity to object was not available to the reporter.}{\f0\insrsid8466058\charrsid8466058  }{\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 It was repre
sented at oral argument however that the PDN's legal counsel later spoke with the trial court judge regarding the case and this particular hearing.}{\f0\insrsid8466058\charrsid8466058  }{\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 
At that time, legal counsel learned discovery was turned over to defense counsel under seal and an order memorializing this procedure was forthcoming.}{\f0\insrsid8466058\charrsid8466058  }{\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 
We do not know if this order was ever issued.
\par 
\par [7]\tab The Court is presented with two issues: 1) Whether the mandamus relief sought by the PDN is the appropriate remedy under the circumstances of this case; and 2) Whether the trial court used proper procedures when it effectively closed the court.

\par 
\par [8]\tab This Court reviews de novo}{\i\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058  }{\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 whether mandamus relief is the appropriate remedy in a particular case.}{\f0\insrsid8466058\charrsid8466058  }{
\i\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 Seattle Times v. United States District Court for the Western District of Washington,}{\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058  845 F.2d 1513, 1515 (9th Cir. 1988).
\par 
\par [9]\tab The Court initially finds that petitioners such as Guam Publications, Inc. have standing to seek review by writ of mandamus of orders denying them access to proceedings or to sealed documents.}{\f0\insrsid8466058\charrsid8466058  }{
\i\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 United States v. Brooklier,}{\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058  685 F.2d 1162 (9th Cir. 1982).}{\f0\insrsid8466058\charrsid8466058  }{\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 
Because this case presents issues capable of repetition yet evading review, the controversy is not moot.}{\f0\insrsid8466058\charrsid8466058  }{\i\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 Richmond Newspapers, Inc. v. Virginia, }{
\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 448 U}{\f0\insrsid8466058 .S. 555, 100 S.Ct. 2814 (1980).}{\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 
\par 
\par }\pard \qj \li720\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin720\itap0\pararsid8466058 {\b\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 ANALYSIS
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid8466058 {\f0\insrsid8466058\charrsid8466058 
\par }{\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 [10]\tab Mandamus relief is an extraordinary remedy employed in extreme situations.}{\f0\insrsid8466058\charrsid8466058  }{\i\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 
Levine v. United States District Court for Central District of California}{\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 , 764 F.2d 590, 593 (9th Cir. 1985)(citing }{\i\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 Clorox Corp. v. United States District Court}{
\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 , 756 F.2d 699, 700 (9th Cir.1985)).}{\f0\insrsid8466058\charrsid8466058  }{\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 It is used }{\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 to confine an inferior court to a lawful exercise of its prescribed jurisdiction or to compel it to exercise its authority when it is its duty to do so.}{\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid8466058\charrsid8466058  }{\i\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 Bauman v. United States District Court,}{\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 
 557 F.2d 650, 654 (9th Cir 1977)(citations omitted).
\par 
\par [11]\tab Mandamus will issue under the followin
g guidelines: 1) The party seeking the writ has no other adequate means, such as direct appeal, to attain the relief he or she desires; 2) The petitioner will be damaged or prejudiced in a way not correctable on appeal; 3) The court's order is clearly err
oneous as a matter of law; 4) The court's order is an oft-repeated error, or manifests a persistent disregard of the rules; and 5) The court's order raises new and important problems, or issues of law or first impression. }{
\i\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 Bauman,}{\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058  557 F.2d at 654-655.}{\f0\insrsid8466058\charrsid8466058  }{\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 Beca
use all of these particular standards may not be relevant or applicable to a particular case, its disposition will require balancing the pertinent guidelines. Id.
\par 
\par [12]\tab Clearly, the first and second factors support issuance of the writ herein.}{\f0\insrsid8466058\charrsid8466058  }{\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 The petitioner is not a party to the case and therefore, lacks the ability to appeal. }{
\i\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 Seattle Times,}{\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058  845 F.2d at 1515; See also }{\i\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 United States v. Sherman, }{\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 
581 F.2d 1358, 1360-1361 (9th Cir. 1978).}{\f0\insrsid8466058\charrsid8466058  }{\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 In addition, the fifth factor also favors writ relief.}{\f0\insrsid8466058\charrsid8466058  }{\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 
Although both federal and state courts have previously addressed the closure of proceedings, we consider this issue for the first time.}{\f0\insrsid8466058\charrsid8466058  }{\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 
The fourth factor is neutral and favors neither party.}{\f0\insrsid8466058\charrsid8466058  }{\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 Although this controversy occurred only once in this particular litigation, the issue has been previously examined indepen
dently by several judges of the Superior Court.}{\f0\insrsid8466058\charrsid8466058  }{\i\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 People of the Territory of Guam v. Francis Gill and Thomas Andersen,}{\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 
 CF 0119-90 (Superior Ct. of Guam, Decision and Order issued October 1, 1990); }{\i\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 People of the Territory of Guam v. Edward Glenn Demapan, }{\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 
CF 0149-95 (Superior Ct. of Guam, November 8, 1995)(As a result of objection, trial court conducted hearing on right of access held by the press).}{\f0\insrsid8466058\charrsid8466058  }{\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 
Thus, the crucial factor is whether the court's order is clearly erroneous as a matter of law.}{\f0\insrsid8466058\charrsid8466058  }{\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 We now address this issue
\par 
\par [13]\tab A presumption exists that the press and public have the right of access to criminal proceedings and documents.}{\f0\insrsid8466058\charrsid8466058  }{\i\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 Richmond Newspapers, Inc. v. Virginia, }{
\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 448 U.S. 555, 100 S.Ct. 2814 (1980); }{\i\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 CBS, Inc. v. United States}{\i\f0\insrsid8466058\charrsid8466058  }{\i\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 
District Court for the Central District of California,}{\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058  765 F.2d 823, 825 (9th Cir. 1985).}{\f0\insrsid8466058\charrsid8466058  }{\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 
When this right of access becomes an issue in a particular proceeding, two considerations must be addressed: 1) whether the place and process has historically been open to the press and general public;}{\cs15\f0\super\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 
\chftn {\footnote \pard\plain \qj \li0\ri0\sa240\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \f37\fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\b\fs20\insrsid8338470      }{\cs15\b\fs20\super\insrsid8338470 \chftn }{\b\fs20\insrsid8338470 
As to pretrial procedures, if no common law counterpart can be found, the First Amendment should be interpreted in light of current values and conditions; societal interests rather than historical analysis should determine the applicabil
ity of the amendment to such proceedings. }{\b\i\fs20\insrsid8338470 Brooklier}{\b\fs20\insrsid8338470 , 685 F.2d at 1170 (citations omitted). }}}{\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058  and 2) whether public access plays a signifi
cant positive role in the functioning of the particular process in question. }{\i\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 Press Enterprise Company v. Superior Court of California for the County of Riverside}{\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 
, 478 U.S. 1, 106 S.Ct. 2735, 2740 (1986)(}{\i\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 Press Enterprise II}{\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 ).
\par 
\par [14]\tab Although the right of access may attach to a particular proceeding, it is not absolute. }{\i\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 Press Enterprise II}{\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 , 106 S.Ct. at 2740; }{\i\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 
Associated Press v. United States District Court for the Central District of California,}{\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058  705 F.2d 1143, 1145 (9th Cir. 1983).}{\f0\insrsid8466058\charrsid8466058  }{\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 
The presumption of openness may be overcome and result in closure of proceedings.}{\f0\insrsid8466058\charrsid8466058  }{\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 Based on demonstrated findings, clo
sure will occur in order to preserve higher values and if narrowly tailored to serve that interest. }{\i\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 Press Enterprise Company v. Superior Court of California for the County of Riverside,}{
\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058  464 U.S. 501, 104 S.Ct. 819, 824 (1984)(}{\i\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 Press Enterprise I}{\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 ). 
\par 
\par [15]\tab In situations where the defendant's right to a fair trial conflicts with the right of access, the burden rests on the party seeking closure to "establish that the
 procedure is strictly and inescapably necessary in order to protect the fair-trial guarantee." }{\i\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 Brooklier}{\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 , 685 F.2d at 1167; }{\i\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 
Associated Press}{\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 , 705 F.2d at 1145.}{\f0\insrsid8466058\charrsid8466058  }{\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 A party meets his burden when three separate substantive tests are satisfied. }{
\i\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 Brooklier,}{\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058  685 F.2d at 1167.}{\f0\insrsid8466058\charrsid8466058  }{\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 
First, there must be a substantial probability that irreparable damage to a defendant's fair-trial right will result from a public proceeding. Second, there must be a substantial probability that alternatives to closure will not protect adeq
uately the defendant's right to a fair trial.}{\f0\insrsid8466058\charrsid8466058  }{\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 Third, a substantial probability must exist that closure will be effective in protecting against the perceived harm.}{
\f0\insrsid8466058\charrsid8466058  }{\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 Id.}{\f0\insrsid8466058\charrsid8466058  }{\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 
\par 
\par [16]\tab Finally, two procedural prerequisites must also be satisfied before entering an order closing the procedures: 1) those excluded from the proceeding must be afforded a reasonable opportunity to state their objec
tions; and 2) the reasons supporting closure must be articulated in findings.}{\f0\insrsid8466058\charrsid8466058  }{\i\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 Brooklier}{\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058  685 F.2d at 1168.}{\f0\insrsid8466058\charrsid8466058 
 }{\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 The reasons should be specific enough so a reviewing court may determine whether the closure order was properly entered.}{\f0\insrsid8466058\charrsid8466058  }{\i\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 Press-Enterprise I}{
\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 , 104 S.Ct. at 824. 
\par 
\par [17]\tab It is apparent from the filed briefs and oral argument that the inferior court did not follow procedural prerequisites similar to those articulated in }{\i\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 Brooklier.}{\f0\insrsid8466058\charrsid8466058  }{
\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 First, the court did not provide an opportunity to object to those present in the courtroom.}{\f0\insrsid8466058\charrsid8466058  }{\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 
The reporter's opportunity to object was lost as a result of the manner in which the proceeding was conducted.}{\f0\insrsid8466058\charrsid8466058  }{\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 The concealed dis
cussions prevented the press from discerning the need to challenge the proceeding let alone articulate an objection.}{\f0\insrsid8466058\charrsid8466058  }{\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 Moreover, this pre-trial conference was held open to the public.
}{\f0\insrsid8466058\charrsid8466058  }{\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 The judge took the bench and the case was called while the press was present.}{\f0\insrsid8466058\charrsid8466058  }{\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 
Under these circumstances, the reporter acted reasonably by anticipating findings by the court to be announced.}{\f0\insrsid8466058\charrsid8466058  }{\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 Courtroom decorum and orderly case management, in fact, dema
nd such restraint.}{\cs15\f0\super\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 \chftn {\footnote \pard\plain \qj \li0\ri0\sa240\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \f37\fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\b\fs20\insrsid8338470      }{
\cs15\b\fs20\super\insrsid8338470 \chftn }{\b\fs20\insrsid8338470 
In our view, the discussions at issue took place within the context of a hearing held open to the public.  This opinion, therefore, should not be read to say that "bench conferences" or "in chamber" meetings are subject to public 
viewing.  We need not and do not address this issue.}}}{\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 
\par 
\par [18]\tab The court also did not comply with the second }{\i\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 Brooklier }{\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 prerequisite.}{\f0\insrsid8466058\charrsid8466058  }{\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 
A record was not generated nor did the court articulate reasons in support of closure.}{\f0\insrsid8466058\charrsid8466058  }{\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 The fai
lure to create a record of the bench conference or to document findings in support of sealing documents preclude adequate review.}{\f0\insrsid8466058\charrsid8466058  }{\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 Conse
quently, this Court cannot determine, and need not determine, whether the lower court addressed the substantive issues outlined above.
\par 
\par [19]\tab Closing the proceeding without articulating findings in support of such action and the failure to provide an opportunity to object by those present is clearly erroneous as a matter of law.}{\f0\insrsid8466058\charrsid8466058  }{
\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 We conclude that the third factor supports issuance of the writ.
\par 
\par [20]\tab All factors under the mandamus test, with the exception of the fourth, support issuance of the writ.}{\f0\insrsid8466058\charrsid8466058  }{\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 
We therefore grant petitioner's request for mandamus relief and order the inferior court to cease closing future proceedings unless substantive findings are properly articulated in support of closure and procedural prerequisites are followed.}{
\f0\insrsid8466058\charrsid8466058  }{\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 
\par 
\par [21]\tab We also order the inferior court to conduct a hearing and determine whether the sealed documents should be made available to the public and press.}{\f0\insrsid8466058\charrsid8466058  }{\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 
The hearing and all subsequent hearings shall be conducted in accordance with the substantive issue outlined above and the procedural guidelines set forth below:}{\f0\insrsid8338470 
\par }{\f0\insrsid8466058\charrsid8466058 
\par }\pard \qj \fi-698\li1418\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin1418\itap0\pararsid8466058 {\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 1. \tab If time permits, a written motion to close proceedings or seal documents shall be filed in advance of the proceeding.}{
\f0\insrsid8466058\charrsid8466058  }{\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 We require the lower court to calendar motions to close proceedings on the docket.}{\f0\insrsid8466058\charrsid8466058  }{\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 
Thus, the media will be given the opportunity to timely object and file appropriate motions, if necessary.}{\f0\insrsid8466058\charrsid8466058  }{\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 If time does not 
permit, oral motions to close proceedings shall be made in open court prior to the proceedi}{\f0\insrsid8466058 ng for which closure is sought.}{\f0\insrsid8338470 
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid8466058 {\f0\insrsid8466058\charrsid8466058 
\par }\pard \qj \fi-698\li1418\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin1418\itap0\pararsid8466058 {\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 2. \tab Members of the public objecting to closure at that time shall be afforded a reasonable opportunity to state objections.}{
\f0\insrsid8338470 
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid8466058 {\f0\insrsid8466058\charrsid8466058 
\par }\pard \qj \fi-698\li1418\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin1418\itap0\pararsid8466058 {\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 3.\tab If necessary, the court will conduct an in camera hearing to determine the need for closure.}{\f0\insrsid8338470 
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid8466058 {\f0\insrsid8466058\charrsid8466058 
\par }\pard \qj \fi-698\li1418\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin1418\itap0\pararsid8466058 {\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 4.\tab If the court orders closure, attorneys for the public would be prohibited from discussing information that is the sub
ject of the closure order.}{\f0\insrsid8338470 
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid8466058 {\f0\insrsid8466058\charrsid8466058 
\par }\pard \qj \fi-698\li1418\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin1418\itap0\pararsid8466058 {\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 5. \tab The court will make a record of its findings in any decision to close proceedings.}{\f0\insrsid8466058\charrsid8466058  }{
\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 In addition, we order the trial court to ensure that private conferences held at the bench are properly recorded for review purposes.
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid8466058 {\f0\insrsid8466058 
\par }\pard \qj \fi-698\li1418\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin1418\itap0\pararsid8466058 {\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 6.\tab When parties agree to seal documents, a motion should be filed along with the stipulation.}{\f0\insrsid8466058\charrsid8466058  }{
\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 The court shall then articulate findings in support or denial of such action.
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid8466058 {\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 
\par }\pard \qj \fi432\li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid8466058 {\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 SO ORDERED this 29th day of October, 1996.
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid8466058 {\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid8466058 {\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 PETER C. SIGUENZA
\par Chief Justice
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid8466058 {\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid8466058 {\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 JANET HEALY WEEKS
\par Associate Justice
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid8466058 {\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid8466058 {\f0\insrsid8338470\charrsid8466058 MONESSA G. LUJAN
\par Associate Justice
\par ____________
\par }}