Loading…
A standing order signed by Debra L. Givens, Presiding Judge of the Superior Court, and dated and filed August 15, 2018: there is no constitutional right to photograph or otherwise electronically record open judicial proceedings, and a courthouse facility qualifies as a nonpublic forum (the order cites published authority); consistent with case law, California Rules of Court, rule 1.150, and Yuba County Superior Court policy, no photographs, video recordings or audio recordings may be taken anywhere on the second and third floors of the Courthouse building - courtrooms, hallways, lobby areas and the court employees offices and work areas included - with any device capable of photographing, recording or broadcasting, unless permitted by an order of the Court; a cellular phone camera may be used only to photograph public documents within a court file at the Clerk's Office; a violation of the order or of California Rule of Court 1.150 is an unlawful interference with the proceedings of the court, which may be the basis for removal from the courthouse, an order terminating media coverage, a misdemeanor citation for contempt of court (Penal Code § 166(a)(4)) or an order imposing monetary or other sanctions as provided by law.
California > Third Appellate District > Yuba County > Superior Court of California, County of Yuba
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF YUBA In the Matter of: USE OF RECORDING AND PHOTOGRAPHY DEVICES IN COURTHOUSE FACILITIES. STANDING ORDER It is well settled that there is no constitutional right to photograph or otherwise electronically record open judicial proceedings. (See Marin Independent Journal v. Municipal Court (1993) 12 Cal.App.4th 1712, 1718 [“Electronic recording of judicial proceedings is subject to the discretion of the court”], citing Nixon v. Warner Communications, Inc. (1978) 435 U.S. 589, 610.) Furthermore, a courthouse facility qualifies as a nonpublic forum. (See, e.g. United States v. Grace (1983) 461 U.S. 171, 178.) Consistent with case law, California Rules of Court, rule 1.150, and Yuba County Superior Court policy, no photographs, video recordings or audio recordings may be taken anywhere on the second and third floors of the Courthouse building, including but not limited to: courtrooms, hallways, lobby areas, or the court employees offices and work areas, with any device capable of photographing, recording or broadcasting, unless permitted by an order of the Court. A cellular phone camera may be used only for the purpose of photographing public documents within a court file at the Clerk’s Office. Any violation of this standing order, or California Rule of Court 1.150, is an unlawful interference with the proceedings of the court and may be the basis for removal from the courthouse, an order terminating media coverage, a misdemeanor citation for contempt of court (Penal Code § 166(a) (4), or an order imposing monetary or other sanctions as provided by law. DATED: August 15, 2018 DEBRA L. GIVENS PRESIDING JUDGE OF THE SUPERIOR COURT
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF YUBA In the Matter of: USE OF RECORDING AND PHOTOGRAPHY DEVICES IN COURTHOUSE FACILITIES. STANDING ORDER It is well settled that there is no constitutional right to photograph or otherwise electronically record open judicial proceedings. (See Marin Independent Journal v. Municipal Court (1993) 12 Cal.App.4th 1712, 1718 [“Electronic recording of judicial proc
Reviewer note: Transcribed 2026-10-11 (California T4 Yuba build 2026-10-11) by eye from BenchPath custody ca/t4/ca-yuba/docs/standing-order-use-recording-photography-devices.pdf (173253 bytes, sha256 e812f0c4262839c1c36d618367da21af03ec4824c396e065796db424709bc712; 2 pages; page images, no text layer): read on the page images rendered at 200 dpi (the citations and the last line of page 1 read again at 300 and 600 dpi; the file has no text layer); checked against RapidOCR on each page, never published: every 6-word window of the transcription looked up, and the 8 spans the reading does not hold - 5 of them the caption's columns, a closing quotation mark and bracket the reading carries as “'l”, the reading's “610o.” and the page break before “by law.”; 3 read again on the page images: “Journal”, which the reading gives as “Jourmal”, and the printed lines 18 and 27 of page 1, for which the reading returns no row (vision/check-log.txt). The Presiding Judge's handwritten signature and the clerk's filing stamp are not part of the text; the pleading line numbers, the page numbers and the running footer are not carried; the parenthesis the print leaves open before “Penal Code § 166(a) (4),” is carried as printed; the day “15” written by hand on the date line is set as text; the transcription's closing note, which describes the pages, is not published.
Standing order of the 109th Judicial District Court for every pending or later-filed case in Andrews, Winkler and Crane Counties: any attorney or self-represented litigant who uses any form of artificial intelligence for legal research or drafting in a case must, before using AI-generated information in a court submission or proceeding, sign and submit the court's certification form stating that all language, quotations, sources, citations, arguments and legal analysis created or contributed to by generative AI were verified as accurate by a human through traditional (non-AI) legal sources, and acknowledging responsibility and potential sanctions for their or their co-counsel's failure to comply. Effective immediately; in effect until rescinded or replaced.
Standing order of the 109th Judicial District Court for every pending or later-filed case in Andrews, Winkler and Crane Counties: any attorney or self-represented litigant who uses any form of artificial intelligence for legal research or drafting in a case must, before using AI-generated information in a court submission or proceeding, sign and submit the court's certification form stating that all language, quotations, sources, citations, arguments and legal analysis created or contributed to by generative AI were verified as accurate by a human through traditional (non-AI) legal sources, and acknowledging responsibility and potential sanctions for their or their co-counsel's failure to comply. Effective immediately; in effect until rescinded or replaced.