People v. Anthony R.

• Decision Date: 13 November 1996
• Citation: 170 Misc.2d 626,651 N.Y.S.2d 1009
• Parties: The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Plaintiff, v. ANTHONY R., Defendant.
• Court: New York County Court

Page 1009

651 N.Y.S.2d 1009

170 Misc.2d 626

The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Plaintiff, v. ANTHONY R., Defendant.

Nassau County Court.

Nov. 13, 1996.

Denis E. Dillon, District Attorney of Nassau County, Mineola, for plaintiff.

DANIEL PALMIERI, Judge.

The People move, ex parte, for an order pursuant to CPL Section 160.50(1)(d)(ii) directing the unsealing of the file maintained by the Nassau County District Attorney's Office relating to SI # 1 of 96, Indictment 95142 and to make it available to (1) the Nassau County District Attorney's Office, (2) Members of the Internal Affairs Unit of the Nassau County Police Department and (3) with the exception of the Grand Jury minutes, the United States Department of Justice, including the United States Attorney's Office and the Federal Bureau of Investigation.

STATEMENT OF FACTS

On December 30, 1995, Christopher Wade, a 28 year old black male was shot and killed by a Nassau County Police Officer. After 5 months' investigation of the incident, a presentment was made to a Nassau County Grand Jury which voted a no-true bill.

The Office of the United States Department of Justice for the Eastern District wishes to review the Nassau County District Attorney's file with regard to the circumstances of Christopher Wade's death for possible violations of Federal Civil Rights Laws.

Both the Nassau County District Attorney's Office and the Internal Affairs Unit of the Police Department wish to investigate other conduct of the Nassau County Police Officer who was the subject of the Wade investigation with regard to several other unrelated arrests which resulted in Grand

Jury presentments. They wish to investigate whether the same Police Officer filed false reports or testified falsely. Other than the unsupported, conclusory statement, "In order to properly investigate these allegations, it is necessary to review the information relating to these cases contained in the Wade investigation file," there are no other specific facts stated to support this request.

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

For the following reasons this application is denied in its entirety, with prejudice, except as to the United States Department of Justice including the United States Attorney's Office and the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and as to them it is without prejudice.

CPL 160.50(1)(d)(ii) states such records shall be made available to the person accused or to such person's designated agent, and shall be made available to "... (ii) a law enforcement agency upon ex parte motion in any superior court, if such agency demonstrates to the satisfaction of the court that justice requires that such records be made available to it". (Emphasis added). As there is no affirmation in support of such request from the United States Department of Justice, the United States Attorney's Office or the Federal Bureau of Investigation, there has been no compliance with the statutory requirements. Additionally there has been no showing by these agencies that justice requires the unsealing of the file in issue. Matter of Hynes v. Karassik, 47 N.Y.2d 659, 419 N.Y.S.2d 942, 393 N.E.2d 1015 (1979) mot. for rearg. den. 48 N.Y.2d 656, 421 N.Y.S.2d 1032, 396 N.E.2d 488. It is also noted there has been no request for this Court to exercise its inherent discretionary power in the interests of justice, to unseal said records and this Court chooses not to as there has been no showing of any extraordinary circumstances nor a compelling need. Matter of Hynes, supra at 664, 419 N.Y.S.2d 942, 393 N.E.2d 1015 and Matter of Dondi, 63 N.Y.2d 331, 482 N.Y.S.2d 431, 472 N.E.2d 281 (1984).

The request of the Internal Affairs Unit of the Nassau County Police Department is denied as it is not a "law enforcement agency", and therefore is not entitled to obtain sealed records under CPL 160.50(1)(d)(ii). Matter of Joseph M, 82 N.Y.2d 128, 603 N.Y.S.2d 804, 623 N.E.2d 1154 (1993); Matter of New York State Police v. Charles Q., 192 A.D.2d 142, 600 N.Y.S.2d 513 (3rd Dept.1993). The Legislature limited the scope of the statutory authority provision to the hiring of a police officer or peace officer and made no provision for access to records in connection with a disciplinary proceeding against a police office. State Police v. Charles Q, supra at 145, 600 N.Y.S.2d 513.

Turning to the request of the Nassau County District Attorney's Office, CPL 160.50 provides for the sealing of investigatory records relating to the arrest and prosecution of an accused upon the termination of a criminal proceeding in his or her favor. This statute creates a privilege to insure that one who is charged but not convicted of an offense suffers no stigma as a result of having once been the subject of an unsustained accusation. Kalogris v. Roberts, 185 A.D.2d 335, 586 N.Y.S.2d 806 (2nd Dept.1992) citing Matter of Hynes v. Karassik, supra at 662, 419 N.Y.S.2d 942, 393 N.E.2d 1015. To effectuate this purpose, CPL 160.50 employs language that is mandatory. Matter of Joseph M, supra at 132, 603 N.Y.S.2d 804, 623 N.E.2d 1154.

CPL 160.50(1)(d)...