The Fourth Circuit on Monday ruled that a North Carolina man was given a fair trial even though the courtroom was temporarily closed after a witness believed someone in the audience was trying to intimidate them.

The three-judge panel held that Tamarcus Ellis did not have his Sixth Amendment rights violated by the decision to shutter the courtroom during one witness' testimony, noting U.S. Supreme Court precedent is applied less restrictively when the public gallery is closed only temporarily.

"[W]e conclude that in the circumstances of this case, where the closure was partial as to persons excluded and temporally limited, we apply a more relaxed test than that for a total closure of the courtroom," Circuit Judge Paul V. Niemeyer said in the opinion. "Applying this test, we conclude that the district court properly found a 'substantial reason' for the partial closure, that the partial closure was no broader than necessary, and that there were no reasonable alternatives."

Ellis was charged by federal prosecutors with trafficking "substantial amounts" of methamphetamine and selling the drugs to undercover agents. He was additionally charged in state court with the murder and concealment of murder of a confidential informant, the opinion noted, with a jury later convicting him on those counts. The opinion further specified that the informant's body had been burned and dismembered.

On the first day of Ellis' trial in August 2024, prosecutors called two witnesses, one of which was Malcolm Russell, who had cooperated with the government during its investigation of Ellis. Russell's testimony was split into two days, and on the second day, the federal judge presiding over the case said a member of the public was attempting to intimidate Russell.

The district judge said he received a message from the U.S. Marshal's Service that a member of the public "clicked" their teeth and rocked back and forth during Russell's testimony. The district judge then heard testimony from a U.S. marshal who filed the report and ruled the courtroom should be closed for the rest of Russell's testimony, the opinion said.

Ellis' attorney objected to the decision, saying he should be allowed to have his family present and that he had a right to a public trial under the Sixth Amendment. The attorney argued that even a temporary closure of the courtroom would violate the public trial clause of the Sixth Amendment.

The district judge allowed Ellis' family to remain in the courtroom but closed the gallery to anyone else for the rest of Russell's testimony. The courtroom reopened once the testimony had concluded and the judge had a chance to consult with the courtroom security, the opinion noted.

The trial then continued normally, with the gallery remaining open to the public. After the four-day trial, the jury found Ellis guilty of drug trafficking and conspiracy charges. He was later sentenced to 40 years in federal prison for the drug-related charges, according to the opinion.

Ellis appealed his conviction on the grounds that the trial was not public during portions of Russell's testimony. In response, the government said the closure was trivial and the conviction should remain in place.

The Fourth Circuit noted that the U.S. Supreme Court held in Waller v. Georgia  in 1984 that total closures of courtrooms during trials do violate the Sixth Amendment — yet circuit courts across the country have since held that partial court closures, where the public is limited for only a portion of the trial, are constitutional.

The opinion cites its own precedent as well as cases from the First, Second, Third, Fifth, Sixth, Eighth, Ninth, Tenth and Eleventh circuits that partial closures like in Ellis' trial are constitutional. An analysis of whether a temporary closure of the courtroom is constitutional uses a "less demanding" version of the test developed in Waller, the circuit court said.

The panel found that because the district judge in Ellis' case had a "substantial reason" to close the courtroom, the decision was not unconstitutional — further noting the closure was limited only to the testimony of Russell.

An attorney representing Ellis and a spokesperson for the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Eastern District of North Carolina did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

Circuit Judges Paul V. Niemeyer, G. Steven Agee and Julius N. Richardson sat for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit.

The government is represented by Lucy Partain Brown, W. Ellis Boyle and David A. Bragdon of the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Eastern District of North Carolina.

Ellis is represented by Joseph Edward Zeszotarski Jr. of Gammon & Zeszotarski PLLC.

The case is USA v. Tamarcus Shaquan Ellis, case number 25-4028, in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit.

--Editing by Philip Shea.