Minnesota Court of Appeals Reverses Prior Restraint on TV Station's Publication of Court Document

From In re TEGNA v. Sandoval, decided yesterday by the Minnesota Court of Appeals (Chief Judge Susan Segal, joined by Judges Bratvold and Larson); seems right to me:

KARE 11 obtained a copy of [a] sentencing memorandum [in Sandoval's criminal case] from Minnesota Court Records Online (MCRO). The district court subsequently determined that the sentencing memorandum had been incorrectly designated as a public document and granted the defendant's request for a protective order, which provides that:

1. No additional copies of the Sentencing Memorandum or any portion of the Sentencing Memorandum shall be made by parties who had accessed it, or any other representative or agent of the parties who accessed it;
2. Said Sentencing Memorandum shall not be used for any purpose other than consideration by the court and the parties for sentencing;
3. Said Sentencing Memorandum shall not be publicly exhibited, shown, displayed, used for educational, research or demonstrative purposes, or used in any other fashion, except in judicial proceedings in the above-referenced action; and
4. Said Sentencing Memorandum may be viewed only by the parties; their counsel and their counsel's employees, investigators, and experts; and as directed by the Court for judicial proceedings in the above-referenced action.

In addition to signing the written order, the district court ordered on the record that "if there were any copies that were reproduced … those should be destroyed and are not to be distributed." We refer to the district court's written and oral orders together as "the July 19 order." …