USA v. Paul Girard

Circuit 3May 26, 2026

Split Score

SplitScore: 50/100

Case Summary

Disposition

Affirmed

The Third Circuit affirmed the convictions of Paul Girard and Kareem Harry, holding that although the courtroom was closed to in-person spectators for the first trial day and the defendants’ mothers were later kept out for several days, these Sixth Amendment public-trial violations did not warrant reversal under plain-error review. The court concluded the errors did not seriously affect the fairness or integrity of the proceedings and declined to order a retrial.

View Full Opinion Document (PDF)

Circuit Split Identified

Legal Issue

Whether requiring all spectators to watch a criminal trial exclusively via an audiovisual overflow room constitutes a 'total closure' (triggering the Waller overriding-interest test) or only a 'partial closure' (triggering a lesser, substantial-reason test) under the Sixth Amendment public-trial right.

Circuit Positions

Circuit 3(this circuit)

Remote-feed-only access is a total closure requiring an overriding interest under Waller.

Circuit 5

Remote-feed-only access is merely a partial closure requiring only a substantial reason.

Conflict Summary

The Fifth Circuit has classified remote-feed-only access as a partial closure, thereby applying a more lenient substantial-reason standard, while the Third Circuit in this opinion rejects that view, characterizing such a restriction as a total closure that demands an overriding interest and the full Waller analysis.

Parties & Counsel

Parties

Appellant:Paul Girard & Kareem Harry
Appellee:United States of America

Legal Counsel

Appellant:Margulis Gelfand DiRuzzo & Lambson; The Morrison Firm; The Walker Legal Group
Appellee:United States Department of Justice (Scott A.C. Meisler; Tory D. Roberts)