Epstein Secrets

ves a fair trial. See Sheppard v. Maxwell, 384 U.S. 333, 348, 86 S. Ct. 1507, 16 L. Ed. 2d 600 (1966); State ex. reL Miami Herald Publishing Co. v. McIntosh, 340 So. 2d 904, 910 (Fla. 1976); Sentinel Commc'n Co. v. Watson, 615 So. 2d 768, 769 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993). The limitations imposed by a court on co

impediment to a court prohibiting counsel from making prejudicial statements that are intended for publication). 13. The Florida Supreme Court in McIntosh, 340 So. 2d at 910, recognized that restrictions on extrajudicial comment are within the power of the trial judge: Limitation placed on lawyers, li

991). 16. The foregoing authorities make perfectly clear that in appropriate cases extrajudicial statements can and should be prohibited. See also Rodriguez v. Feinstein, 734 So. 2d 1162, 1164-65 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999) (proper for a court to determine on a case-by-case basis whether good cause is shown to impose limitat

es a fair trial. See Sheppard v. Maxwell, 384 U.S. 333, 348, 86 S. Ct. 1507, 16 L. Ed. 2d 600 (1966); State ex. rel. Miami Herald Publishing Co. v. McIntosh, 340 So. 2d 904, 910 (Fla. 1976); Sentinel Commc'n - 4 - FOIVLER WHITE BURNER P.A. • ESPIRITO SANTO PLAZA, 1395 BRICKELL AVENUE, 14u , FLOOR. MIAM

impediment to a court prohibiting counsel from making prejudicial statements that are intended for publication). 13. The Florida Supreme Court in McIntosh, 340 So. 2d at 910, recognized that restrictions on extrajudicial comment are within the power of the trial judge: Limitation placed on lawyers, li

991). 16. The foregoing authorities make perfectly clear that in appropriate cases extrajudicial statements can and should be prohibited. See also Rodriguez v. Feinstein, 734 So. 2d 1162, 1164-65 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999) (proper for a court to determine on a case-by-case basis whether good cause is shown to impose limitat

ion his case in the public light. This is clearly effecting Epstein's right to obtain a fair and just trial. State ex rel. Miami Herald Pub. Co. v. McIntosh, 340 So.2d 904, 910-11(1976)(Muzzling lawyers who may wish to make public statements to gain public sentiment for their clients has long been recog

on of discovered information before trial is not the kind of classic prior restraint that requires exacting first Amendment scrutiny." Id. See also Rodriguez v. Feinstein, M.D., 734 So.2d 1162 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999)(any order restraining press access must consider less restrictive alternatives including, but not limited