Cantwell v. Ryan, 2 N.Y.3d 620 (2004)
A court lacks the authority to order a prosecutor to submit charges to a grand jury that are different from those previously considered and dismissed by a prior grand jury.
Summary
This case addresses the scope of a court’s authority to order the resubmission of charges to a grand jury after the initial grand jury declined to indict on certain charges. Following a grand jury’s refusal to indict on murder charges, a County Court Judge, concerned that lesser charges were not considered, ordered the prosecutor to present the case to a second grand jury and instruct it to consider manslaughter and criminally negligent homicide charges. The Appellate Division prohibited the enforcement of the judge’s orders, and the Court of Appeals affirmed, holding that the judge exceeded his authority under CPL 190.75(3), which only permits the court to authorize resubmission of the *same* charge previously dismissed, not different or lesser charges.
Facts
After a grand jury returned a “no true bill” on intentional and depraved indifference murder charges against Lawrence Crouthers, a grand juror expressed concern that lesser charges should be considered.
The County Court Judge arranged for the juror to appear in court, directing the prosecutor to be present with the grand jury’s foreperson and ordering the prosecutor to produce the grand jury minutes.
The prosecutor stated he had no intention of re-presenting the matter.
The court concluded that the evidence supported manslaughter in the second degree and criminally negligent homicide charges.
The court ordered the prosecutor to present the case to another grand jury and to instruct it to consider those lesser charges.
Procedural History
The County Court Judge issued an order directing the prosecutor to present lesser charges to a second grand jury.
After the prosecutor sought to reargue, the court issued a second order clarifying that the prosecutor could choose which lesser crimes to submit.
The Appellate Division granted the District Attorney’s petition prohibiting the County Judge from enforcing its orders.
The Court of Appeals affirmed the Appellate Division’s decision.
Issue(s)
Whether a County Court Judge has the authority under CPL 190.75(3) to order a prosecutor to submit charges to a grand jury that are different from those previously considered and dismissed by a prior grand jury?
Holding
No, because CPL 190.75(3) only allows a court to authorize resubmission of the *same* charge that the grand jury had previously considered and dismissed, not other or additional (i.e., lesser) charges.
Court’s Reasoning
The Court of Appeals focused on the plain language of CPL 190.75(3), which states that a charge dismissed by a grand jury “may be resubmitted to a grand jury only if the court ‘in its discretion authorizes or directs the people to resubmit *such charge* to the same or another grand jury’ (emphasis supplied).”
The court reasoned that the County Court Judge’s order to submit *different* charges (specifically, lesser included offenses) exceeded the scope of authority granted by the statute. Since the judge did not direct the District Attorney to resubmit the *same* charge that the grand jury had previously considered and dismissed, the order was invalid.
The Court of Appeals adopted the reasoning of the Appellate Division, emphasizing a strict interpretation of the statutory language.
The decision highlights the limits on judicial intervention in the prosecutorial process, emphasizing that the authority to direct grand jury proceedings is primarily vested in the District Attorney, subject only to the specific exceptions outlined in the Criminal Procedure Law.