Unlawful Grand Jury Proceedings

Jay Leiderman
By: Jay Leiderman
July 25 2016

THE GRAND JURY PROCEEDINGS VIOLATED DEFENDANT’S DUE PROCESS RIGHTS

The grand jury’s ability to safeguard accused persons against felony charges which it believes unfounded is an attribute of due process of law inherent in the grand jury proceeding; this attribute exists for the protection of persons accused of crime before the grand jury, which is to say that it is a ‘constitutional right;’ any prosecutorial manipulation which substantially impairs the grand jury’s ability to reject charges which it may believe unfounded is an invasion of the defendant’s constitutional right.

(People v. Backus (1979) 23 Cal.3d 360, 392 [quoting the Court of Appeals opinion upheld by Johnson v. Superior Court (1975) 15 Cal.3d 248].)  Indeed, “irregularities at grand jury proceedings should be closely scrutinized because protection of the defendant’s rights is entirely under the control of the prosecution without participation by the defense.”  (Berardi v. Superior Court (2007) 149 Cal.App.4th 476, 495-496.)

During the first day of grand jury proceedings and on the record, two grand jurors made statements demonstrating they had prejudged the case and the defendants.  Pursuant to Penal Code § 939.5, these grand jurors were required to withdraw from service.  That section reads, in full:

Before considering a charge against any person, the foreman of the grand jury shall state to those present the matter to be considered and the person to be charged with an offense in connection therewith.  He shall direct any member of the grand jury who has a state of mind in reference to the case or to either party which will prevent him from acting impartially and without prejudice to the substantial rights of the party to retire. Any violation of this section by the foreman or any member of the grand jury is punishable by the court as a contempt.

(Penal Code § 939.5 [emphasis added]; see also Packer v. Superior Court (2011) 201 Cal.App.4th 152, 163 [“all grand jurors have a statutory duty to withdraw from serving on a particular case if they harbor a bias or prejudice against the defendant”].)

For many years, California courts have held that a grand jury foreperson or biased juror’s failure to satisfy this statutory duty to withdraw is not a ground for setting aside an indictment.  (See People v. Jefferson (1956) 47 Cal.2d 438, 442; People v. Kempley (1928) 205 Cal. 441, 448.)  However, they have also recognized that improper grand jury proceedings may “result in a denial of a defendant’s due process rights, requiring dismissal of the indictment.”  (Stark v. Superior Court (2011) 52 Cal.4th 368, 417 [emphasis added].)

Recently, the Second District Court of Appeal discussed at length the “unsettled issue” of whether a defendant has a due process right to an unbiased grand jury.  (Packer, supra, 201 Cal.App.4th at pp. 158, 166-172.)  In Packer, Grand Juror No. 2 was a secretarial employee of the High Tech Task Force that assisted in the police investigation of that case.  (Id. at p. 159.)  When questioned, she explained that she had handled some of the evidence, entering information about a seized computer into a Task Force system and putting the physical computer in an evidence room.  (Id. at pp. 160, 162.)  However, Juror No. 2 had no knowledge of the contents of the computer.  (Id. at p. 162.)  She also assured the prosecutor that there was nothing that would make it difficult for her to render an unbiased decision.  (Ibid.)

The court surveyed both federal and state precedent, finding case law support on both sides of the question whether due process requires an unbiased grand jury.  (Packer, supra, 201 Cal.App.4th at pp. 167-168.)  Supreme Court precedent endorses the idea, at least as a rule in federal courts.  (Compare Beck v. Washington (1962) 369 U.S. 541, 546 [“It may be that the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment requires the State, having once resorted to a grand jury procedure, to furnish an unbiased grand jury.”], with Costello v. United States (1956) 350 U.S. 359, 363 [the Fifth Amendment requires a federal indictment to be “returned by a legally constituted and unbiased grand jury”]; see also United States v. Finley (N.D. Ill. 1988) 705 F.Supp. 1297, 1306 [reading the Supreme Court’s opinions to hold that “defendants in federal court do have a right to an unbiased grand jury”].)  And California precedent suggests that any irregularity which “substantially impair[s] the independence and impartiality of the grand jury” violates due process.  (Stark, supra, 52 Cal.4th at p. 417; see also Backus, supra, 23 Cal.3d at p. 392.)  Importantly, the Packer court emphasized that due process concerns are heightened where, as here, they are accompanied by claims of prosecutorial impropriety.  (Packer, supra, 201 Cal.App.4th at p. 168; see also infra Part II, Subpart B.)

Ultimately, the Packer court was not required to decide whether due process requires an unbiased grand jury, instead upholding the trial court’s determination that the defendant had failed to demonstrate Juror No. 2 was actually biased.  (Packer, supra, 201 Cal.App.4th at p. 169.)  It stressed that Juror No. 2’s participation in the Task Force was “clerical”: “she did not participate in [the] analysis and had no knowledge of the computer’s contents.”  (Id. at pp. 169-170.)  While upholding the Packer defendant’s conviction, the court left some parting advice for prosecutors: “Given the unsettled state of the law, a prudent prosecutor would seek the court’s intervention where bias is apparent or at least questionable.”  (Packer, supra, 201 Cal.App.4th at p. 172.)  Of course, no intervention was sought in this case.

 

Unlawful Grand Jury Proceedings
Attorney Jay Leiderman intently studies his computer. He is always looking for that one case or one piece of evidence that will turn the case around

 

12 thoughts on “Unlawful Grand Jury Proceedings

  1. Information on this guide is common in nature and is meant for informational functions only; it’s
    not authorized, well being, investment or tax recommendation. makes no illustration as to the accuracy of the data
    offered and assumes no legal responsibility for any damages or loss arising from its use.

  2. Attractive element of content. I simply stumbled upon your web site and in accession capital to claim that
    I get actually loved account your blog posts.
    Any way I’ll be subscribing for your augment or even I success you access consistently
    quickly.

  3. Some truly nice and useful innformation onn
    this web site, as well I bbelieve tthe design has wonderful
    features.

  4. I feel this is one of the most significant info for me.
    And i am satisfied studying your article. But want to commentary on few normal things, The website style is perfect.

  5. I don’t even know how I ended up here, but I thought this post wass great.
    I don’t know who you are but definitely you’re motions are useful.

  6. I’m really enjoying the design and layout of your site. It’s a very
    easy on the eyes which makeds it much more pleasant for me
    to come here and visit morde often. Diid yyou hire out a developer to create your theme?

  7. Puesto que porque todo el material erótico que vamos publicando en nuestra página y
    redes sociales día tras día se relaciona con el planeta del porno , las
    chicas más calientes y más zorras de toda la
    red que jamás vas a poder hallar en alguna otra web relacionada con el
    planeta porno.

  8. Stalker gets arrested for stalking! Rot in Hell, JoJo. You lost at life. Fucker! Fuck you, Sue Basko, too. You’re next. Crooked psycho narcissist co-conspirator. You gonna hide without your sociopath to protect you?

    http://jeffco.us/wil/search.do;jsessionid=0F1D910D58621C27ED3D6379FC3304B0

    http://www.bullyville.com/uploads/files/Camparrested892016_1.png

    http://www.irontroll.com/2016/08/jojo-camp-arrested-again-assault.html

    JoJo Camp was arrested yesterday in Lakewood, Colorado. He is currently being held on numerous charges including displaying a deadly weapon, stalking, harassment, violating a restraining order, assault, and bribery.

    JoJo, who hasn’t been out of jail much in recent years, made national headlines when he hacked a university computer network, fled the state, and then was apprehended while trying to sell the identities of thousands of students and faculty to an undercover FBI officer.

    JoJo spent time in prison for the hacking and was released early only to be sent back to finish out his sentence after stalking and harassing a Florida lawyer and her child.

    After being released a second time, JoJo continued his harassment of the lawyer and had a permanent restraining order put out against him last year. Naturally he chose to ignore the PRO but left New York and moved to Colorado.

    JoJo attempted to start a business and a new life in Colorado in Mime related activities (yes, Mime) but wasn’t too successful. He was arrested early Tuesday morning after being set up by one of his victims. It appears he’s being held without bail.

    Mr Camp was running as an independent candidate for Colorado House District 1. Let’s hope this arrest doesn’t interupt his campaign too much.

  9. Lol, Joseph Camp arrested again!

    http://www.irontroll.com/2016/08/jojo-camp-arrested-again-assault.html

    UPDATE: JoJo had his pretrial hearing, the court dockets are here

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    JoJo Camp was arrested yesterday in Lakewood, Colorado. He is currently being held on numerous charges including displaying a deadly weapon, stalking, harassment, violating a restraining order, assault, and bribery.

    JoJo, who hasn’t been out of jail much in recent years, made national headlines when he hacked a university computer network, fled the state, and then was apprehended while trying to sell the identities of thousands of students and faculty to an undercover FBI officer.

    JoJo spent time in prison for the hacking and was released early only to be sent back to finish out his sentence after stalking and harassing a Florida lawyer and her child.

    After being released a second time, JoJo continued his harassment of the lawyer and had a permanent restraining order put out against him last year. Naturally he chose to ignore the PRO but left New York and moved to Colorado.

    JoJo attempted to start a business and a new life in Colorado in Mime related activities (yes, Mime) but wasn’t too successful. He was arrested early Tuesday morning after being set up by one of his victims. It appears he’s being held without bail.

    Mr Camp was running as an independent candidate for Colorado House District 1. Let’s hope this arrest doesn’t interupt his campaign too much.

    http://www.irontroll.com/2016/08/american-hostage-20-jojo-camp-arraigned.html

    American Hostage 2.0, JoJo Camp Arraigned, Held On $100,000 Bond

    JoJo Camp had a pretrial hearing yesterday regarding numerous charges from his arrest on Tuesday. He’s been charged with several felonies including a Second Degree assault charge that is considered a Crime Of Violence and carries a minimum sentencing of 5 years just by itself. And then there’s the strangulation assault…

    Considering that along with the stalking and harassing charges as well as JoJo’s stalking and hacking history, it looks like JoJo will be gone awhile.

    Bond was set at $100,000, which JoJo certainly doesn’t have, so he’ll be in Jefferson county jail awaiting his two court dates coming up this month on August 16th and the 17th. A couple of the charges against JoJo are being handled by a separate court and judge which could mean separate sentencing. It does not look good for JoJo.

    I did not see any charges for being a mime. I hope those will be forthcoming later this month.

  10. Out of compassion the judge set me free my kindness befriended my Spirit & Soul together we went back home. Waiting. I was surrounded by them knowing ahead of me will be the longest night I will ever experience in years, because I was determined to stay awake for that call.
    TalkLeft: The Politics Of Crime
    http://www.talkleft.com/

    ACLU: Prisoners’ Rights – American Civil Liberties Union
    https://www.aclu.org/issues/prisoners-rights

    Content from PoetrySoup.com. Read more at: http://www.poetrysoup.com/poems/best/lawyer
    Copyright © PoetrySoup and Respective Poets.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *