Docket sheets and other information related to the Warren County death-penalty murder case against James A. McDaniel has been unavailable for at least two days.

On Tuesday, reporters looking for the latest information in the case visited a website that displays docket sheets for adult offenders in Pennsylvania. The information about the open case against McDaniel was gone.

A call to the Warren County prothonotary’s office determined that the case had been sealed.

The attorneys representing McDaniel John Ingros and Fred Humme, both of Punxsutawney filed a motion asking Judge Maureen Skerda to allow them to permit ex parte – one party – filing and to seal portions of the case.

Skerda neither granted nor denied that motion. On Aug. 18, she ordered that there be a hearing on the issue. That hearing is set for 2:30 p.m. Friday.

The documents related to the case should be publicly available until then. According to Court Administrator Linda Critzer, the sealing of those documents was done in error.

The attorneys have been appointed by the court and expenses would fall to Warren County for payment.

According to the motion, McDaniel would be “denied the effective assistance of counsel” if the attorneys had to apply to the county every time they want to employ an expert, specialist, or investigator.

“He will be required to reveal defense strategy to the Commonwealth merely to secure funding…” according to the motion. “Were this defendant not indigent he could retain whomever he chose to assist in his defense and not be required to reveal same to the Commonwealth or any person until such time as the rules of discovery mandate and then only if such person would be called to testify.”

They asked to be allowed to file for expenses ex parte – without representation for the other side being present – and to have those requests for payments under seal.

Warren County Public Defender John Parroccini represents defendants who cannot afford to hire private attorneys.

“In my 20 years of experience, I’ve never filed such a motion,” Parroccini said.

He said the prosecution knows the defense will employ experts, specialists, and investigators. The specifics of what those people are doing and what they find out are considered “attorney work product” and are not revealed to the other side’s representation until legally required as disclosure, and then only if those products are to be used in the case.

Ingros and Hummel argue that the “unique severity and irrevocable nature of the death penalty” require “stricter procedural safeguards” than non-capital cases.

The motion goes on to say that having to file requests “openly and unsealed will permit access by the press to such requests and may reveal the nature of confidential defenses to the guilt phase or confidential strategies to the punishment phase of this case. Such revelations will serve to contaminate a potential jury pool.”