Circuit Court v. Florida Times-Union [1]

On January 14, 2010, during the second day of a high-profile murder trial, Circuit Judge L. Page Haddock of the Fourth Judicial Circuit Court in Duval County, Florida, ordered a reporter for the Florida Times-Union's Jacksonville.com [2] to stop live-blogging the trial. Reporter Bridget Murhpy had been posting her live updates to a Jacksonville.com page dedicated to the trial [3], which also hosts streaming video coverage of the trial. 

The judge stated that that the computer was distracting the jury and that live-blogging violates a Florida Supreme Court order about how many transmitting devices are allowed in a courtroom.  According to regular court practice in the jurisdiction, one television camera and one still photographer also were covering the proceedings, and the judge ruled that only two devices total were permitted.  Later that day, counsel for the newspaper presented argument before the court and filed a written motion, but Judge Haddock denied its motion to allow live-blogging. (The judge's order and the newspaper's motion are contained in Exhibits 1 and 3 of Petitioner's Appendix [4].) 

The next day, Judge Haddock issued an amended order (contained in Exhibit 5 of the Petitioner's Appendix [4]), which appears to allow use of electronic media on a limited basis.  According to MediaPost [5], the Times-Union is interpreting the new order as allowing it to alternate between taking still photos and live-blogging in the case.

On January 15, the newspaper filed an emergency petition [6] with the District Court of Appeal for review of the trial court's orders.

Update:

1/20/10 - The District Court of Appeal granted the petition for emergency appea [7]l and quashed the order denying the newspaper's motion for laptop access. He appellate court sent the case back to the trial court with instructions to allow the newspaper's reporter to use a laptop in the courtroom "unless the court finds a specific factual basis to conclude that such use cannot be accommodated without undue distraction or disruption."  According to Jacksonville.com [8], this ruling was fiollowed by a new decision from Judge Haddock that leaves in place the reporting restrictions he imposed on January 15.