Harper v. Angiolillo

• Decision Date: 06 May 1997
• Citation: 89 N.Y.2d 761,658 N.Y.S.2d 229,680 N.E.2d 602
• Parties: , 680 N.E.2d 602 In the Matter of Tony HARPER, Appellant, v. Daniel D. ANGIOLILLO, as Judge of the Westchester County Court, et al., Respondents.
• Court: New York Court of Appeals Court of Appeals

Page 229

658 N.Y.S.2d 229

89 N.Y.2d 761, 680 N.E.2d 602

In the Matter of Tony HARPER, Appellant, v. Daniel D. ANGIOLILLO, as Judge of the Westchester County Court, et al., Respondents.

Court of Appeals of New York.

May 6, 1997.

Beldock Levine & Hoffman, L.L.P., New York City (Peter A. Perlman and Myron Beldock, of counsel), for appellant.

Dennis C. Vacco, Attorney-General, New York City (Michael O. Hueston, Barbara G. Billett and Thomas D. Hughes, of counsel), for Daniel D. Angiolillo, respondent.

Jeanine Pirro, District Attorney of Westchester County, White Plains (Joseph M. Latino and Richard E. Weill, of counsel), respondent pro se.

OPINION OF THE COURT

SMITH, Judge.

The primary issue on this appeal is whether a former defendant in a criminal proceeding which terminated in his favor may obtain automatic access to all files relating to his arrest and prosecution from the Westchester County District Attorney's office pursuant to CPL 160.50(1)(d) through a CPLR article 78 proceeding for mandamus. Petitioner seeks to use these files in a Federal civil proceeding. We affirm the judgment of the Appellate Division because petitioner has failed to demonstrate a clear legal right to the material in possession of the District Attorney's office. Moreover, in seeking the wholesale production of the District Attorney's files from a Judge sitting in the Criminal Term of County Court, petitioner has presented his request for relief to an inappropriate forum.

A Grand Jury in Westchester County indicted petitioner for aiding and abetting and acting in concert with another in committing the crimes of robbery in the second degree, grand larceny in the fourth degree and assault in the second degree. In March 1994, after reviewing the Grand Jury minutes, County Court dismissed the indictment due to insufficient evidence of accessorial liability. County Court also denied the People leave to re-present the case to another Grand Jury. The criminal proceeding terminated in petitioner's favor upon entry of the County Court order (see, CPL 160.50[3][b] ) and the record of the proceeding was sealed pursuant to CPL 160.50.

Petitioner thereafter commenced a civil action in Federal Court against the City of White Plains and members of the White Plains Police Department for damages arising out of his arrest and prosecution. During discovery, petitioner served a subpoena on the Westchester County District Attorney's office to inspect and copy the records pertaining to his criminal prosecution. When the District Attorney refused to comply with the subpoena, petitioner filed a motion pursuant to CPL 160.50 in the Criminal Term of Westchester County Court seeking "[a]ll records and papers of the Office of the Westchester County District Attorney's office [sic ] relating to [petitioner's] arrest and prosecution." Petitioner also sought an order requiring the production of the Grand Jury minutes. The motion bore the caption and indictment number of petitioner's terminated criminal proceeding.

County Court denied the motion in its entirety. Petitioner thereafter commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding at the Appellate Division by order to show cause to compel the unsealing and production of the District Attorney's files and to vacate the County Court order. The article 78 petition alleged that the District Attorney's office had violated CPL 160.50 by refusing to make the files in its custody available to the petitioner. The petition urged the Appellate Division to order the District Attorney to "unseal her files from the criminal case against Petitioner and to provide Petitioner with full access for inspection and copying." The petition further alleged that County Court had erred in denying petitioner's motion for access to the files. The Appellate Division dismissed the proceeding on the ground that petitioner had failed to justify the "extraordinary remedy of mandamus" (229 A.D.2d 495, 646 N.Y.S.2d 276). We granted petitioner leave to appeal.

CPL 160.50 provides that upon the "termination of a criminal action or proceeding against a person in favor of such person," and where the interests of justice do not require otherwise, "the record of such action or proceeding shall be sealed" (CPL 160.50[1] ). The statute further requires that

"(c) all official records and papers, including judgments and orders of a court but not including published court decisions or opinions or records and briefs on appeal, relating to the arrest or prosecution, including all duplicates and copies thereof, on file with the division of criminal justice services, any court, police agency, or prosecutor's office shall be sealed and not made available to any person or public or private agency; and

"(d) such records shall be made available to the person accused or to such person's designated agent".

Petitioner, who has abandoned his claim to the Grand Jury minutes, contends that CPL 160.50 grants him "unconditional" access to the files held by the District Attorney's office.

The nature of our review on this appeal is circumscribed by the form of action brought by the petitioner--an article 78 proceeding in the nature of mandamus to compel. "Mandamus, of course, is an extraordinary remedy that, by definition, is available only in limited circumstances" (Klostermann v. Cuomo, 61 N.Y.2d 525, 537, 475 N.Y.S.2d 247, 463 N.E.2d 588). Indeed, "[m]andamus lies to compel the performance of a purely ministerial act where there is a clear legal right to the relief sought" (Matter of Legal Aid Socy. v. Scheinman, 53 N.Y.2d 12, 16, 439 N.Y.S.2d 882, 422 N.E.2d 542).

As stated in the article 78 petition, petitioner seeks (1) vacatur of the County Court order denying his motion for "all" records and papers of the District Attorney's office pertaining to his arrest and prosecution, and (2) an order directing the Westchester County District Attorney to unseal the relevant files and provide petitioner with "full access" for inspection and copying. We must determine whether petitioner has demonstrated a clear legal right to this relief.

In demanding free and unlimited access to the entirety of the District Attorney's files, petitioner equates every item in those files with the "official records and papers" referred to in CPL 160.50(1)(c). Thus, in seeking to cast his claim for relief here as a clear legal right, petitioner argues that CPL 160.50(1)(d) imposes a bright line rule requiring the disclosure of everything contained in a prosecutor's files. Such a conclusion is contradicted by the plain language of the statute which limits the accused's access to all official records and papers, rather than permitting free access to any and all records and papers, without limitation.

Moreover, although CPL 160.50 specifies judgments and orders of a court as items "included" in the category of official records and papers, the statute is otherwise silent on the nature of such "official" material (see, CPL 160.50[1][c] ) further supporting the conclusion that bright line rules are not wholly appropriate in this area. Indeed, such records and papers are not always subject to easy identification and may vary according to the circumstances of a particular case (Matter of Dondi, 63 N.Y.2d 331, 337, 482 N.Y.S.2d 431, 472 N.E.2d 281).

Thus, in Matter of Dondi, we held that "on the facts of this case" certain "testimonial evidence" consisting of an incriminatory tape recording constituted an official record subject to CPL 160.50(1)(c) (id., at 337-338, 482 N.Y.S.2d 431, 472 N.E.2d 281). However, in Matter of Hynes v. Karassik, 47 N.Y.2d 659, 661-662, 419 N.Y.S.2d 942, 393 N.E.2d 1015, we affirmed the Appellate Division's determination that "two tape recordings introduced into evidence at the criminal trial were not within the definition of 'official records and papers' protected by the sealing sta...