Minn. R. Crim. P. 18.09
An indictment must not be dismissed on the ground that one or more of the grand jurors was not statutorily qualified if it appears from the records that 12 or more qualified jurors concurred in finding the indictment.
Minn. R. Crim. P. 18.09
Comment-Rule 18
Rule 18.01, subd. 2 complies with the constitutional requirement that the persons on the grand jury list must be selected at random from a fair cross section of the qualified residents of the county. The method by which this must be done is left to the determination of the jury commission or judges making the selection of persons for the list.
Rule 18.01, subd. 2 includes special provisions governing St. Louis County based on Minn. Stat. §§ 484.46 and 484.48.
Rule 18.03 allows qualified interpreters for jurors with sensory disabilities to be present during grand jury proceedings including deliberations or voting. This is in accord with Minn. Stat. § 593.32 and Rule 809 of the Jury Management Rules in the General Rules of Practice for District Courts, which prohibit exclusion from jury service for certain reasons including sensory disability. Further, this provision allows the court to make reasonable accommodation for such jurors under the Americans with Disabilities Act. 42 U.S.C. § 12101 et seq.
Under Rule 18.04, subd. 1, the record may be disclosed to the court or to the prosecutor, and to the defendant for good cause, which would include a "particularized need," Dennis v. United States, 384 U.S. 855, 869-70 (1966), or on a showing that grounds exist for a motion to dismiss the indictment because of occurrences before the grand jury. In addition, the defendant, under Rule 9.01, subd. 1, may obtain from the prosecutor any portions of the grand jury proceedings already transcribed and possessed by the prosecutor.
Rule 18.04, subd. 2, supplementing the discovery rules (Rule 9.01, subd. 1), permits the defendant to obtain a transcript of the testimony of grand jury witnesses, subject to protective orders under Rule 9.03, subd. 5. See ABA Standards, Discovery and Procedure Before Trial, 2.1(a)(iii) (Approved Draft, 1970). This rule does not preclude the court from ordering that the defendant be supplied with the transcript during the trial, on a showing of good cause.
Canon 5 of the Code of Professional Responsibility for Interpreters in the Minnesota State Court System bolsters the confidentiality requirement of interpreters under Rule 18.07.
Rule 18.07 leaves it to the discretion of the prosecutor to determine whether to notify the defendant or defense counsel of the indictment without the issuance of a warrant or summons. But see Minn. Stat. § 628.68 (leaving it to the court's, not prosecutor's, discretion).
The effect of a dismissal of an indictment under Rule 18.09 is covered by Rule 17.06, subd. 4.