Opinions of the United 2007 Decisions States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit

7-2-2007 USA v. Wecht Precedential or Non-Precedential: Precedential Docket No. 06-3098

Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_2007 Recommended Citation "USA v. Wecht" (2007). 2007 Decisions. Paper 667. http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_2007/667

This decision is brought to you for free and open access by the Opinions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit at Villanova University School of Law Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in 2007 Decisions by an authorized administrator of Villanova University School of Law Digital Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected].

PRECEDENTIAL

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT

Nos. 06-3098, 06-3099, 06-3195, 06-3202, 06-3212 and 06-3213

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Appellant in No. 06-3195 v. CYRIL H. WECHT, Appellant in No. 06-3098 WPXI, INC., Intervenor Appellant in Nos. 06-3099 and 06-3202 PG PUBLISHING CO. D/B/A THE PITTSBURGH POST- GAZETTE, Intervenor Appellant in Nos. 06-3212 and 06-3213 TRIBUNE-REVIEW PUBLISHING CO., and HEARST-ARGYLE STATIONS, INC. D/B/A WTAE-TV, Intervenors.

On Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania (D.C. No. 2:06-cr-00026) District Judge: Honorable Arthur J. Schwab

No. 06-3704

IN RE: DR. CYRIL H. WECHT _____ On Petition for Writ of Mandamus Related to Western District of Pennsylvania D.C. No. 2:06-cr-00026 District Judge: Honorable Arthur J. Schwab

Argued September 12, 2006 Before: FUENTES, FISHER, and BRIGHT,* Circuit Judges.

( Opinion Filed April 12, 2007) _______ Jerry S. McDevitt (ARGUED) Richard L. Thornburgh Mark A. Rush Amy L. Barrette J. Nicholas Ranjan Kirkpatrick & Lockhart Nicholson Graham LLP Smithfield Street Pittsburgh, PA 15222 Attorneys for Cyril H. Wecht Douglas Letter (ARGUED)

* Honorable Myron H. Bright, United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit, sitting by designation.

Appellate Litigation Counsel, Civil Division Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. Washington, DC 20530 Richard A. Friedman (ARGUED) Appellate Section, Criminal Division United States Department of Justice 10th Street & Constitution Avenue, N.W. Washington, DC 20530 Mary Beth Buchanan United States Attorney Peter Keisler Assistant Attorney General Robert L. Eberhardt Assistant United States Attorney Rebecca Ross Haywood (ARGUED) Assistant United States Attorney Stephen S. Stallings (ARGUED) Office of United States Attorney Grant Street Suite 400 Pittsburgh, PA 15219 Attorneys for United States of America Walter P. DeForest (ARGUED) David J. Berardinelli George Bobb DeForest Koscelnik Yokitis & Kaplan 3000 Koppers Building Pittsburgh, PA 15219 Attorneys for Intervenors WPXI, Inc. David J. Bird (ARGUED) W. Thomas McGough Joseph F. Rodkey, Jr. Reed Smith LLP Sixth Avenue Pittsburgh, PA 15219 Attorneys for Intervenors PG Publishing Co. D/B/A the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

David A. Strassburger (ARGUED) Strassburger, McKenna, Gutnick & Potter, P.C.

Four Gateway Center, Suite 2200 Liberty Avenue Pittsburgh, PA 15222 Attorney for Intervenor Tribune-Review Publishing Co. and Hearst-Argyle Stations, Inc. D/B/A WTAE-TV

ORDER AMENDING OPINION

FUENTES, Circuit Judge.

IT IS NOW ORDERED in the above captioned case be amended as follows: Footnote 9 shall now read: This holding applies to the local rules of all the district courts in our Circuit. Presently, Local Rule of Criminal Procedure 53.1 in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania contains a “reasonable likelihood” standard. The Middle District of Pennsylvania, in Local Rule 83.2, and the District of New Jersey, in Local Rule of Criminal Procedure 101.1, already have a “substantial likelihood” of material prejudice standard, as does the District of the Virgin Islands, where Local Rule of Criminal Procedure 1.2 incorporates Local Rule of Civil Procedure 83.2 which adopts the ABA’s Model Rules of Professional Conduct. The District of Delaware appears not to have a local rule governing attorney communications in criminal cases, though a Local Rule of Civil Procedure 83.6(d)(2) does adopt the ABA’s Model Rules of Professional Conduct for civil proceedings.

The following changes shall be made to footnote 12: “forty-nine” shall be changed to “fifty”; “forty-three” shall be changed to “forty-four”; “Thirty-six” shall be changed to “Thirty-five”; and “, including the three rules in Pennsylvania,” shall be deleted.

At the top of page 19, the sentence beginning with “Moreover, the changes . . .” shall be deleted and replaced with: Moreover, as a result of the changes we impose, district courts in our Circuit will now apply the same trial publicity standard, one that is also consistent with the rules of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and the States of New Jersey and Delaware.13

/s/ Julio M. Fuentes Circuit Judge

DATED: July 2, 2007