Skip to main content

Commonwealth v. Curley

Citations

  • 189 A.3d 467

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • holding that the trial court erred in failing to “issue individualized, specific, particularized findings on the record that closure [was] essential to preserve higher values and is narrowly tailored to that interest”
  • noting that proffers of evidence, which “were never docketed, formally filed with the court, or required by any rule of criminal procedure,” are not “public judicial documents” subject to the “right of First Amendment or common law access”
  • stating “once evidence has been disseminated to the general public, it cannot be resealed; the cat is out of the bag, so to speak”
  • order denying request for public access to a criminal proceeding or judicial documents constitutes a collateral order from which an immediate appeal may be taken
  • “Docket entries and other filings in a criminal proceeding are public records.”
  • “Docket entries . . . in criminal proceedings are public records[;]”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Nichols, Ransom, Stabile

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

1 case in this archive cites this case.

Cites

26 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.