Share This Page

Orie appeal to delay 2nd trial

The attorney for state Sen. Jane Orie appealed her case to the state Superior Court on Friday, delaying her second trial which had been scheduled to start next week.

Allegheny County Common Pleas Judge Jeffrey A. Manning agreed to postpone the case until the appellate court decides whether to take the appeal.

The former Republican whip is seeking to have her corruption case thrown out on double jeopardy grounds and to have Manning removed as trial judge. Manning denied both of those requests this week, calling the double jeopardy claim "frivolous."

Orie's first trial ended on March 3 when Manning halted jury deliberations and declared a mistrial because he agreed with prosecutors that the defense had introduced forged documents during the case. The forgery is under investigation.

Orie, 49, of McCandless, is accused of using her state-paid staff to do campaign work for her and her sister, Supreme Court Justice Joan Orie Melvin. Another sister, Janine Orie, 56, of McCandless, an aide to Melvin, also is charged. Melvin, 54, of Marshall, is not charged but is under investigation.

Manning blasted Orie's defense in his opinion. But the senator's attorney, William Costopoulos, fired back in his appeal.

"Judge Manning's grant of a mistrial here is unprecedented in American (let alone Pennsylvania) jurisprudence and his lengthy, detailed opinion in which he is unable to cite any authority for his ... mistrial declaration underscores the merit of Senator Orie's double jeopardy motion and, alternatively, the need to recuse the trial judge from any further involvement in this case," Costopoulos wrote.

Costopoulos and Mike Manko, a spokesman for District Attorney Stephen A. Zappala Jr., declined to comment, citing a gag order in the case.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.