Equal Justice & the Grand Jury: Achieving Racial Fairness

The grand jury has long drawn criticism for failing to serve its purpose as a shield against unwarranted charges. Recently a new charge has been leveled: that prosecutorial influence over the grand jury permits law enforcement misconduct to go unpunished. Both facets of the issue are discussed in turn by two distinguished panels of experts.

Due Process & the Grand Jury: Protecting Targets and Witnesses

The grand jury has long drawn criticism for failing to serve its purpose as a shield against unwarranted charges. Recently a new charge has been leveled: that prosecutorial influence over the grand jury permits law enforcement misconduct to go unpunished. Both facets of the issue are discussed in turn by two distinguished panels of experts.

What is a criminal defense lawyer's duty when representing a client before a grand jury when the client informs the lawyer he or she will commit perjury to protect a friend or associate?

Rather than a bulwark against "hasty, malicious and oppressive prosecution," today's federal grand jury is too often a rubber stamp, leading many to agree that "a good prosecutor could get a grand jury to indict a ham sandwich." 

NACDL calls upon Congress to halt the dangerous erosion and abuse of the federal grand jury and enact the modest proposals outlined in our Federal Grand Jury Reform Report & "Bill of Rights."

NACDL created The Commission to Reform the Federal Grand Jury, drawing on the expertise of a variety of professionals throughout the criminal justice system. Commissioners spent two years examining the need for changes in the grand jury process and produced a Federal Grand Jury Bill of Rights based on their findings. The ten reforms set forth in this Bill of Rights, largely echoing those proposed by the American Bar Association (ABA) more than 20 years ago, would restore balance to the grand jury process and better protect against unwarranted prosecutions. [Released May 2000]

NACDL issued a groundbreaking new report on restoring and reforming the grand jury system. This research reflects an in-depth study of grand jury reform in two states – New York and Colorado – and produces with four reform recommendations. [Released November 2011]

Defense attorney Harold Gurewitz discusses Michigan’s use of a so-called one-man grand jury.

Comments to the Judicial Conference of the United States Practice & Procedure Committee regarding a proposed amendment to define how federal courts should navigate an emergency suspension of rules (new Criminal Rule 62), such as those posed by COVID-19 and directed by the CARES Act (H.R. 748, 2020).

Behind Closed Doors Thomas K. Maher, Christopher Fialko August/September 2000 53 The Fifth Amendment Is Alive and Well In United States v. Dickerson, 166 F.3d 667 (4th Cir. 1999), a divided panel of the Fourth Circuit held that 18 U.S.C. § 3501 effectively overruled the Supreme Court's decision i

The role of the grand jury in capital prosecutions Thomas K. Maher, Christopher Fialko

Letter to the Judicial Conference Standing Committee on Rules of Practice and Procedure regarding proposed changes to the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, except those related to criminal forfeiture.

Letter to the Judicial Conference Standing Committee on Rules of Practice and Procedure regarding proposed changes to the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure applicable to criminal forfeiture.

A new development in New Mexico courts in the matter of In re Grand Jury Presentation Concerning James Bort Jones resulting in a pre-indictment mechanism enabling investigation targets to alert grand jury to exculpatory evidence.

With its opinion In re Grand Jury Presentation Concerning James Bort Jones (N.M. 2009), New Mexico joins a minority of states – Colorado, Maine, North Carolina, New York, Tennessee, and Illinois – that have explicit pre-indictment mechanisms. The court noted the importance of pre-indictment procedures given the irrevocable consequences that an indictment can have on a target’s career and reputation.

In light of the killing of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Mo., should “use of deadly force to arrest” laws be changed? The authors recommend that state statutes be amended to employ an “objective necessity” test in cases involving “deadly force” arrests. This proposed standard would empower grand juries and petit juries to determine if an officer committed a crime — regardless of the officer’s subjective belief that the use of deadly force was necessary.