IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA
MIDDLE DISTRICT
PENNSYLVANIA OFFICE OF : No. 171 MM 2014
ATTORNEY GENERAL, :
:
Petitioner :
:
:
v. :
:
:
SUPERVISING JUDGE OF THE THIRTY- :
FIFTH STATEWIDE INVESTIGATING :
GRAND JURY, :
:
Respondent :
ORDER
PER CURIAM
AND NOW, this 18th day of August, 2015, this Court’s order of December 19,
2014, is hereby UNSEALED.
UNSEALED PER ORDER OF
THE COURT DATED
AUGUST 18, 2015
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA
MIDDLE DISTRICT
PENNSYLVANIA OFFICE OF : No. 171 MM 2014
ATTORNEY GENERAL, :
:
Petitioner :
:
:
v. :
:
:
SUPERVISING JUDGE OF THE THIRTY- :
FIFTH STATEWIDE INVESTIGATING :
GRAND JURY, :
:
Respondent :
ORDER
PER CURIAM
AND NOW, this 19th day of December, 2014, the Application to File under Seal
is GRANTED, and the Petition for Review is DENIED.
This Court notes that, per the opinion of the Supervising Judge William R.
Carpenter, the purpose of the protective order, entered per the authority of 18 Pa.C.S. §
4954, “was/is to prevent the intimidation, obstruction and/or retaliation, in the ordinary
sense of those words . . . . [and] was never intended to prevent the [Office of Attorney
General] from carrying out its constitutional duties.” Opinion, dated 12/12/2014, at 10-
11. Additionally, as explained by Judge Carpenter, the protective order “is not intended
to restrict or impact ‘appropriate public [disclosure]’ of information connected with the
possession and/or distribution of possibly pornographic images by members of the
[Office of Attorney General].” Id. at 11.
Mr. Justice Stevens notes his Dissent and would grant relief to the OAG in the
Application except for that portion that relates to witness intimidation and would direct
that this Order be filed in the normal course of Court business and publically available.
171 MM 2014 - 2