Deanthony Griffin was indicted in Effingham County for murder, and was found guilty on February 19, 2005. Before trial, the appellant, Morris Communications, LLC, d/b/a The Savannah Morning News the “newspaper”, filed a request for permission to use “a still camera for photographs” in its coverage of the trial. The trial court subsequently denied the newspaper’s motion, and the newspaper has now filed this appeal.1 Because our review of the record shows that there is not a factual basis supporting the trial court’s reasons for denying the newspaper’s motion, we reverse. 1. Rule 22 of the Uniform Rules of Superior Court sets forth guidelines governing the electronic and photographic coverage of judicial proceedings. Among other things, Rule 22 P provides that “a request for installation and use of electronic recording, transmission, videotaping or motion picture or still photography of any judicial proceeding shall be evaluated pursuant to the standards set forth in OCGA § 15-1-10.1.” Under that Code section, when considering a request to photograph judicial proceedings, a trial court may consider, among other things, “the impact upon the integrity and dignity of the court”; “the impact on the administration of the court”; “the impact upon due process”; and whether the “proposed coverage will promote increased . . . openness of judicial proceedings.”2 In ruling on a request for electronic and photographic coverage of judicial proceedings, a trial court should bear in mind this State’s policy favoring open judicial proceedings.3 Moreover, although the decision whether to allow electronic and photographic coverage of a trial is within the discretion of the trial court, if a trial court denies such coverage, there must be a factual basis in the record that supports the denial.4
In the present case, the trial court stated that the following factors supported its denial of the appellant’s motion for electronic and photographic coverage: That the defendant objected to the media requests to insure due process and a fair trial; that the jurors desired to have their privacy rights protected and not to have their pictures broadcast; that the presence of a camera in the courtroom would not increase openness of the judicial proceedings; and that, because the courthouse in which the trial was being conducted was small, the presence of cameras in the courtroom would impact on the administration of the court and detract from the ends of justice.
