53 N.Y.2d 247 (1981)
A respondent in a juvenile delinquency proceeding is not automatically entitled to inspect or receive a copy of Grand Jury minutes transferred to Family Court.
Summary
This case addresses whether a juvenile respondent in a delinquency proceeding is automatically entitled to Grand Jury minutes. The Court of Appeals held that there is no automatic right to inspect or receive Grand Jury minutes. While the minutes are part of the transferred “petition,” due process is satisfied by providing the order of removal and other relevant documents. The decision balances the juvenile’s right to notice with the longstanding doctrine of Grand Jury secrecy, determining that secrecy prevails absent a specific statutory directive or a showing that the provided documents are insufficient to provide adequate notice of the charges.
Facts
In Matter of Larry W., the Grand Jury considered respondent Larry W.’s involvement, along with an adult, Robert Pringle, in a robbery. The Grand Jury requested the case against Larry W. be removed to Family Court, accusing him of acts constituting second-degree robbery if committed by an adult. A removal order was filed. In Matter of Glenford S., a felony complaint charged Glenford S. with first-degree robbery. After a preliminary hearing, he was held for Grand Jury action, and an indictment was filed. His case was then removed to Family Court with the District Attorney’s consent.
Procedural History
In Matter of Larry W., the Family Court denied the respondent’s motion to dismiss the petition for lack of jurisdiction and to inspect the Grand Jury minutes. The Appellate Division reversed, granting the motion to obtain a copy of the minutes. The City of New York appealed to the Court of Appeals. In Matter of Glenford S., the Family Court denied the respondent’s motion to have a copy of the Grand Jury minutes served on him or, alternatively, to dismiss the petition. The Appellate Division reversed, granting the motion for copies of the minutes. The District Attorney of Kings County appealed to the Court of Appeals.
Issue(s)
- Whether respondents in juvenile delinquency proceedings are automatically entitled to copies of Grand Jury minutes that have been transferred to Family Court as part of a removal order.
Holding
- No, because there is no statutory command requiring that a copy of the entire petition, including Grand Jury minutes, be served on the respondent, and due process rights to notice can typically be met without providing the Grand Jury minutes.
Court’s Reasoning
The Court acknowledged that CPL 725.05(8) and Family Court Act § 731(3) include Grand Jury minutes as part of the “pleadings and proceedings” transferred to Family Court, which are then deemed the “petition.” However, the critical question is whether respondents are automatically entitled to copies of the entire petition, including the Grand Jury minutes.
The Court found no Family Court Act provision requiring that respondents receive copies of the petitions. The Court emphasized that “absent a statutory command that a copy of the entire petition shall be served on or otherwise be made available to a respondent, the latter’s right thereto would appear to depend on constitutional due process rights to notice.” Relying on Matter of Gault, 387 U.S. 1, 33, the court stated that due process entitlement to notice can usually be satisfied by providing a copy of the order of removal and other documents without the need for Grand Jury minutes.
Requiring the Grand Jury minutes to be furnished would “run counter to the longstanding and fundamental doctrine of the secrecy of Grand Jury minutes,” codified in CPL 190.25(4). Disclosure is only allowed if authorized by statute or directed by a court order. The Court said, “We have no doubt that the Legislature could have directed that in removal cases a copy of the minutes of any Grand Jury proceeding be furnished to the respondent; it is determinative in the two cases now before us that the Legislature made no such statutory direction.”
The purpose of transferring Grand Jury minutes is to place them within the Family Court’s jurisdiction, facilitating compliance with statutory mandates, motions to inspect the minutes, or other situations where a judge deems disclosure necessary.