State ex rel. Wild v. Otis, s. 46898
Decision Date | 12 August 1977 |
Docket Number | 46882,Nos. 46898,s. 46898 |
Parties | STATE of Minnesota ex rel. J. J. WILD, M. D., Ph. D., Appellant, v. James C. OTIS, Esquire, Respondent. STATE of Minnesota ex rel. J. J. WILD, M. D., Ph. D., Appellant, v. Oscar R. KNUTSON, Esq., et al., Respondents. |
Court | Minnesota Supreme Court |
Syllabus by the Court
1. Appellant judges must decide for themselves whether recusal is required in case in which party claims bias.
2. A private citizen has no authority to commence and maintain private prosecutions for alleged violations of criminal law.
J. J. Wild, pro se.
Warren Spannaus, Atty. Gen., Richard B. Allyn, Sol. Gen., Thomas Jensen, Sp. Asst. Atty. Gen., Briggs & Morgan and Leonard J. Keyes, St. Paul, for respondents.
Considered and decided by SHERAN, C. J., and YETKA, SCOTT, WINTON, * and PREECE,* JJ., without oral argument.
These consolidated appeals raise the issue of whether a private citizen may commence and maintain private prosecutions for alleged violations of the criminal law. We hold that he may not.
Prior to commencing the present action, plaintiff, J. J. Wild, requested the county attorneys of Ramsey and Hennepin Counties to approve criminal complaints which he had prepared against defendants, but the respective county attorneys refused to prosecute. Plaintiff then tried unsuccessfully to persuade the grand juries of the two counties to issue indictments. Finally, plaintiff filed complaints himself in an attempt as a private citizen to prosecute defendants.
The complaint against defendants filed in Ramsey County alleged a violation of the criminal laws against conspiracy to commit a crime, Minn.St. 609.175, subd. 2, and corruptly influencing a legislator, § 609.425. The complaint against defendant Mr. Justice James C. Otis in Hennepin County alleged a violation of the criminal law against perjury, § 609.48. The complaints requested that the named defendants be convicted and sentenced according to law. The respective complaints were dismissed by the district courts of Ramsey and Hennepin Counties, and these appeals from judgments followed.
Section 3.42, and the commentary thereto, of the A. B. A. Standards of Judicial Administration, Standards Relating to Appellate Courts (Approved Draft, 1977), state the appropriate standards and procedures to be followed in the case of challenges such as this:
The three justices of the supreme court and the two district court judges assigned to the hearing of this matter pursuant to Minn.Const. art. 6, § 2, and Minn.St. 2.724, subd. 2, have applied these standards for recusal and have determined that the affidavit of prejudice filed by plaintiff against them is without justification. District Court Judge Warren A. Saetre, originally assigned to consider this case, has recused for personal reasons.
In answering this question, we start with Rule 17.01, Rules of Criminal Procedure. This rule contemplates that felonies are to be prosecuted by either indictment or complaint. The rule does not mention or allude to any right of private citizens to commence and maintain criminal prosecutions privately.
Rule 2.02, Rules of Criminal Procedure, governing prosecution by complaint, provides as follows:
"A complaint shall not be filed or process issued thereon without the written approval, endorsed on the complaint, of the prosecuting attorney authorized to prosecute the offense charged, unless such judge or judicial officer as may be authorized by law to issue process upon the offense certifies on the complaint that the prosecuting attorney is unavailable and the filing of the complaint and issuance of process thereon should not be delayed."
This rule is in accord with A. B. A. Standards for Criminal Justice, Standards Relating to the Prosecution Function and the Defense Function (Approved Draft, 1971), § 2.1, which provides: "The prosecution function should be performed by a public prosecutor who is a lawyer subject to the standards of professional conduct and discipline."
The comment to Rule 2.02, Rules of Criminal Procedure, states that "Rule 2.02 leaves to other laws the question of the available remedy when a local prosecutor refuses to approve a complaint." One obvious available remedy is for the aggrieved citizen to try to appear before the grand jury and persuade it to indict. While a citizen does not have a right to appear before the grand jury, ...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
State v. Martineau
...some States prohibit altogether the use of private prosecutors on behalf of interested parties. See, e.g., State ex. rel. Wild v. Otis, 257 N.W.2d 361, 364–65 (Minn.1977), cert. denied 434 U.S. 1003, 98 S.Ct. 707, 54 L.Ed.2d 746 (1978) ; State v. Harrington, 534 S.W.2d 44, 48 (Mo.1976) ; Bi......
-
Aetna Life Ins. Co. v. Lavoie
...challenge might easily be abused to exclude a judge solely because a litigant disagreed with his views." See, also State ex rel. Wild v. Otis, 257 N.W.2d 361 (Minn.1977); contra: State ex rel. Short, Atty. Gen., v. Martin, 125 Okl. 24, 256 P. 681 (1927) (Supreme Court has power to disqualif......
-
State v. Martineau, 2001-681.
...some States prohibit altogether the use of private prosecutors on behalf of interested parties. See, e.g., State ex. rel. Wild v. Otis, 257 N.W.2d 361, 364-65 (Minn.1977), cert. denied 434 U.S. 1003, 98 S.Ct. 707, 54 L.Ed.2d 746 (1978); State v. Harrington, 534 S.W.2d 44, 48 (Mo.1976); Biem......
-
Welfare of M.D.O., Matter of, C3-89-1218
...waived the issue by never alerting the court of appeals to the issue. See Minn.Ct.App.Int.R. 6.2, 6.3; see also State ex rel. Wild v. Otis, 257 N.W.2d 361, 363-64 (Minn.1977) (recusal of an appellate judge is a decision for the individual judge to make). The failure to raise and preserve an......
-
Prosecutors and their State and Local Polities.
...Delegation of the Criminal Prosecution Function to Private Actors, 43 U.C. DAVIS L. REV. 411 (2009). (60) See State ex rel. Wild v. Otis, 257 N.W.2d 361, 365 (Minn. 1977); State v. Harrington, 534 S.W.2d 44, 49-50 (Mo. 1976); JACOBY. supra note 58, at (61) See Abrams. supra note 25 at 13-18......