The trial court may regulate any aspect of the proceedings to ensure that the means of recording will not distract participants or impair the dignity of the proceedings, including limiting coverage of non-parties present in the courtroom. In the absence of a specific order imposing additional or different conditions, the following provisions apply to all proceedings.
Minn. Gen. R. Prac. 4.04
Advisory Committee Comment-2009 Amendments
This rule was initially derived from the local rules of three districts.
The Supreme Court has adopted rules allowing cameras in the courtrooms in limited circumstances, and it is inappropriate to have a written rule that does not accurately state the standards which lawyers are expected to follow. See In re Modification of Canon 3A(7) of the Minnesota Code of Judicial Conduct, No. C7-81- 300 (Minn. Sup. Ct. May 22, 1989). The court has ordered an experimental program for videotaped recording of proceedings for the official record in the Third, Fifth and Seventh Judicial Districts. In re Videotaped Records of Court Proceedings in the Third, Fifth, and Seventh Judicial Districts, No. C4-89-2099 (Minn. Sup. Ct. Nov. 17, 1989) (order). The proposed local rule is intended to allow the local courts to comply with the broader provisions of the Supreme Court Orders, but to prevent unauthorized use of cameras in the courthouse where there is no right to access with cameras.
The rule was amended in 2009 to add Rule 4.02, comprising provisions that theretofore were part of the Minnesota Rules of Judicial Conduct. This change is not intended to be substantive in nature, but the provisions are moved to the court rules so they are more likely to be known to litigants. Canon 3(A)(11) of the Minnesota Code of Judicial Conduct is amended to state the current obligation of judges to adhere to the rules relating to court access for cameras and other electronic reporting equipment.
The extensive amendment of Rule 4 in 2009 reflects decades of experience under a series of court orders dealing with the use of cameras in Minnesota courts. See In re Modification of Canon 3A(7) of the Minnesota Code of Judicial Conduct, Order re: Audio and Video Coverage of Trial Court Proceedings, No. C7-81-300 (Minn. Sup. Ct. April 18, 1983); Order Permitting Audio and Video Coverage of Supreme Court Proceedings, No. C6-78-47193 (Minn. Sup. Ct. April 20, 1983); Amended Order Permitting Audio and Video Coverage of Appellate Court Proceedings, No. C7-81-3000 (Minn. Sup. Ct. Sept. 28, 1983); In re Modification of Canon 3A(7) of the Minnesota Code of Judicial Conduct to Conduct and Extend the Period of Experimental Audio and Video Coverage of Certain Trial Court Proceedings, Order, C7-81-300 (Minn. Sup. Ct. Aug. 21, 1985); In re Modification of Canon 3A(7) of the Minnesota Code of Judicial Conduct, Order re: Audio and Video Coverage of Trial Court Proceedings (Minn. Sup. Ct. May 22, 1989); and In re Modification of Canon 3A(10) of the Minnesota Code of Judicial Conduct, Order, No. C7-81-3000 (Minn. Sup. Ct. Jan. 11, 1996)(reinstating April 18, 1983, program and extending until further order of Court). The operative provisions of those orders, to the extent still applicable and appropriate for inclusion in a court rule, are now found in Rule 4.
Amended Rule 4.01 defines how this rule dovetails with other court rules that address issues of recording or display of recorded information. The primary thrust of Rule 4 is to define when media access is allowed for the recording or broadcast of court proceedings. Other rules establish limits on access to or use of court-generated recordings, such as court-reporter tapes and security tapes. See, e.g., Minnesota Rules of Public Access to Records of the Judicial Branch.
Amended Rules 4.02(a) & (b) are drawn from Canon 3A(11)(a) & (b) of the Minnesota Code of Judicial Conduct prior to its amendment in 2008. Rule. 4.02(c) and the following sections (i) through (vii) are taken directly from the Standards of Conduct and Technology Governing Still Photography, Electronic and Broadcast Coverage of Judicial Proceedings, Exhibit A to In re Modification of Canon 3A(7) of the Minnesota Code of Judicial Conduct, Order re: Audio and Video Coverage of Trial Court Proceedings, No. C7-81-300 (Minn. Sup. Ct. April 18, 1983)
Amended Rule 4.04 establishes rules applicable to the appellate courts, and is drawn directly from Amended Order Permitting Audio and Video Coverage of Appellate Court Proceedings, No. C7-81-3000 (Minn. Sup. Ct. Sept. 28, 1983).