Former Pa. justice Melvin ordered to court over alleged probation violation
Former state Supreme Court Justice Joan Orie Melvin is expected to appear before an Allegheny County judge Tuesday for allegedly violating her probation.
Common Pleas Judge Lester G. Nauhaus ordered Melvin, 57, of Marshall to appear before him because she has not completed part of her sentence: writing letters of apology to her staffers and the nearly 500 judges across Pennsylvania on a photograph of herself in handcuffs.
Melvin contends that writing the apologies requires her to incriminate herself while she is appealing a jury's conviction finding her guilty of using her judicial staff to run campaigns for the Supreme Court in 2003 and 2009.
The county District Attorney's Office said in a court filing this week that “she will suffer no injury if she complies with Judge Nauhaus' directive.” If she doesn't fulfill her sentence, the DA reminded, Nauhaus could sentence her to jail.
The appellate court last week issued a temporary stay while it decides whether that part of Melvin's sentence was illegal.
In addition to writing letters of apology, Nauhaus sentenced the former jurist to serve three years of house arrest, two years on probation and to work at a soup kitchen three days a week.
Melvin's attorneys, Dan Brier and Pat Casey, did not return calls for comment.
Adam Brandolph is a staff writer for Trib Total Media. He can be reached at 412-391-0927 or firstname.lastname@example.org.
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 â 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.