# Commonwealth v. Upshur

> Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · June 20, 2007 · 592 Pa. 273

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9696536

## Case

- **Full name:** COMMONWEALTH of Pennsylvania v. Jamie Lynn UPSHUR, Appeal of WPXI, Inc.
- **Court:** Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
- **Decided:** June 20, 2007
- **Citations:** 592 Pa. 273; 924 A.2d 642; 2007 Pa. LEXIS 1307
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Cappy
- **Judges:** Cappy, Castille, Saylor, Eakin, Baer, Baldwin, Fitzgerald
- **Cited by:** 21 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9696536

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- recognizing that “courts retain supervisory powers over their records and documents”
- recognizing that right to examine public judicial documents is not absolute

## Opinion text

Chief Justice CAPPY
concurring.
I join the Opinion Announcing the Judgment of the Court in all respects. I write separately only to emphasize that WPXI is only entitled to access a copy of the audiotape. There is simply no reason that WPXI should be given custody of the tape itself, as such custody could raise serious security concerns regarding potential evidence. The risk of inadvertent destruction or loss of evidence, is too great. Rather, it is within the trial court’s supervisory powers to determine the best way to provide access to the audiotape in question.
Additionally, I point out that the party seeking access to the document in question should be charged with the costs related to replication.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9696536. Public record. Not legal advice.