Posted 1:58 PM by Creditwrench

N.J. Appellate court: Let citizens seek grand jury probe
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Coburn noted that a federal law allows citizens to ask federal grand juries for permission to appear and make complaints."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wednesday, June 30, 2004
BY ROBERT SCHWANEBERG
Star-Ledger Staff
Breathing new life into a long-forgotten right, a state appeals court ruled yesterday that ordinary citizens who have evidence of criminal wrongdoing can bring their suspicions to a county grand jury and request an investigation.

If it stands, the ruling would end the monopoly that county prosecutors hold on bringing allegations to a grand jury and create a new opportunity for concerned citizens to attack official corruption.

But the Attorney General's Office vowed to appeal, warning that the ruling invites unprecedented troublemaking by vindictive ex-spouses, political opponents and others with a grudge.

"It is a ludicrous decision," said John Hagerty, a spokesman for the state Division of Criminal Justice. "It allows for any citizen or gadfly to walk into a grand jury and try to indict a neighbor. It allows for public officials, during an election, to walk in and endeavor to indict an opponent."

Late yesterday, the Attorney General's Office asked the appeals court to stay its ruling until the New Jersey Supreme Court decides whether to hear the case.

The ruling was a victory for Larry Loigman, an activist lawyer who tried to present allegations of official wrongdoing to the Monmouth County grand jury. A judge told him to take his evidence to the county prosecutor and Loigman, a vocal critic of that office, appealed.

In a unanimous decision, three appeals court judges directed that a letter containing Loigman's allegations be read to the grand jury, which would then decide whether to launch an investigation and call Loigman as a witness.

"It is an excellent ruling for the citizens of the state," Loigman said. "Anyone who's dissatisfied with what's going on, they don't have to rely on the county prosecutor or the attorney general. They have their own representatives sitting there -- the grand jurors -- and now they have a way to approach those people."

"It certainly opens up the door to a whole new area for going after official misconduct," Loigman said.

Actually, the ruling reopens a door that has been so little used in recent years that even judges and prosecutors had forgotten it was there.

Taking a long view of legal history, Appellate Division Judge Donald Coburn concluded that a citizen's right to present allegations to a grand jury is well established. The most recent example he could find of its use in New Jersey was 47 years ago, and one case, from Louisiana, went back to 1893.

But some other states have embraced the right more recently.

Coburn quoted at length from a 1981 ruling of the West Virginia Supreme Court allowing any citizen to present a complaint to the grand jury by applying to the judge in charge of it.

"If the grand jury is available only to the prosecuting attorney and all complaints must pass through him, the grand jury can justifiably be described as a prosecutorial tool," the West Virginia high court wrote.
"If the grand jury is to be a meaningful institution, its integrity must be maintained as an independent body, free from all outside interference and prosecutorial control or direction."

Quoting a 1977 decision by Minnesota's supreme court, Coburn wrote that allowing citizens to bring complaints directly to the grand jury "serves as a kind of 'safety valve' and has much to commend it."

In light of the grand jury's "extraordinary powers of investigation,"he rejected claims by the Attorney General's Office that citizens had no right to bring complaints to the grand jury. Appellate Division Judges Stephen Skillman and Harold Wells joined Coburn's opinion.

Loigman said the case began when a client advised him of financial irregularities in the Middletown Township payroll related to a state grant from an agency within the Attorney General's Office. He said he alerted that agency to the improprieties but "they never conducted an investigation."

In February 2002, Loigman put his allegations into a letter addressed to the Monmouth County grand jury at the county courthouse. When he got no reply, Loigman said, he contacted Assignment Judge Lawrence Lawson, who told him to contact the county prosecutor or attorney general. Instead, he appealed.

The appeals court directed Lawson to have Loigman's letter read to the grand jurors along with any instructions the judge deems appropriate. Coburn said that every letter addressed to a grand jury should be delivered to the assignment judge, who will then "determine whether he or she should instruct the jury on the matter."

Loigman said the ruling applies only to county grand juries as a state law requires the Attorney General's Office to present all cases to the state grand jury. Coburn noted that a federal law allows citizens to ask federal grand juries for permission to appear and make complaints.



Robert Schwaneberg covers legal issues. He can be reached at
rschwaneberg@starledger.com or (609) 989-0324.