Bloomberg Anywhere Bloomberg Professional About Bloomberg


 
High Court Refuses to Limit Gag Orders in U.S. Criminal Cases

By Greg Stohr

Oct. 2 (Bloomberg) -- The U.S. Supreme Court, turning away an appeal by lawyer and television commentator Gloria Allred, refused to limit judges' power to impose gag orders on attorneys and other participants in criminal trials.

The justices, without comment, today rejected Allred's arguments that a judge's order in the murder trial of Scott Dyleski violated the U.S. Constitution's free-speech guarantee. Participants including Allred, who represented Dyleski's girlfriend, were barred from revealing non-public evidence in the case.

The Supreme Court has never considered the rules governing gag orders in criminal cases. Judges issued orders limiting discussion in recent criminal proceedings involving singer Michael Jackson and basketball star Kobe Bryant.

``In virtually every high profile case, it is now routine for trial courts to issue broad gag orders preventing attorneys, parties and witnesses from making public statements,'' Allred argued in papers filed in Washington.

Dyleski, now 17, was convicted Aug. 28 of killing Pamela Vitale, the wife of a prominent San Francisco-area defense attorney, in October 2005 in connection with a scheme to buy marijuana-growing lights using stolen credit card information.

In issuing the gag order in November, Judge David Flinn pointed to ``an extraordinary amount of pretrial publicity,'' including coverage on CourtTV and MSNBC.

``The atmosphere thus far in this proceeding has been highly charged, leading to an environment that, if continued, makes it difficult at best to keep courtroom decorum and preserve a fair trial,'' the judge wrote.

Allred said the judge's order prevented her from publicly discussing mistreatment of her client by prosecutors.

California Attorney General Bill Lockyer urged the Supreme Court not to get involved, saying the trial judge's order was ``narrowly tailored'' and affected only statements that might undermine the fairness of the trial.

``The order does not ban all discussion of the case but only precludes a preview of the evidence,'' he argued.

The case is Allred v. Superior Court, 05-1505.

To contact the reporter on this story: Greg Stohr in Washington at gstohr@bloomberg.net.

Last Updated: October 2, 2006 10:37 EDT

Sponsored links