If the court orders disclosure of matters occurring before the grand jury, the disclosure shall be made in such manner, at such time, and under such conditions as the court may direct.
The court shall afford those persons a reasonable opportunity to appear and be heard.
R.I. Super. Ct. R. Crim. P. 6
2002 Committee Notes
Subdivision (e) has been rewritten. The changes are primarily in form, but several new subsections provide explicit exceptions to the general rule of secrecy regarding grand jury proceedings.
Subdivision (e)(3)(A)(ii) allows an attorney for the State to disclose grand jury proceedings to government personnel (including federal personnel) deemed necessary by an attorney for the State to assist an attorney for the State in the performance of his duties. The rule is similar to the federal rule and is necessary for the investigation and preparation of some more complex criminal cases. Federal and state authorities cooperate in organized crime and racketeering investigations, in public corruption and major fraud cases, and in various other situations where federal and state criminal jurisdictions overlap. Government attorneys in complex grand jury investigations frequently find it necessary to enlist the help of a team of government agents and experts. While the agents are usually state personnel, in certain types of investigations an attorney for the State may wish to obtain the assistance of federal law enforcement personnel.
The disclosure permitted is limited. It is permissible only in connection with the attorney for the State's "duty to enforce criminal law" and only to those personnel "deemed necessary ... to assist" in the performance of that duty. Under subdivision (e)(3)(B), the material disclosed may not be used for any other purpose, and the names of persons to whom disclosure is made must be promptly provided to the court. The attorney for the State is also charged with the responsibility of certifying to the court that he or she has advised those persons to whom disclosure was made under (e)(3)(A)(ii) of their obligation of secrecy under Rule 6.
Subdivision (e)(3)(C)(i) specifically recognizes that an attorney for the state may turn over grand jury transcripts under Rule 16 when the defendant requests discovery. Subdivision (e)(3)(C)(iv) recognizes that it is permissible for the attorney for the State to make disclosure of matters occurring before one grand jury to another state grand jury. Subdivision (e)(3)(C)(v) covers the situation where, during a state grand jury investigation, evidence is developed which suggests a violation of federal law. The subdivision allows a court to permit disclosure to a federal official for the purpose of enforcing federal law when an attorney for the State so requests and makes the requisite showing.
The provision formerly found in Rule 6(e) that "[n]o obligation of secrecy may be imposed upon any person except in accordance with this rule," has been deleted as a result of Section 12-11.1-5.1 of the Rhode Island Code, which punishes "unlawful grand jury disclosure." Subdivision (e)(2) specifically provides that a knowing violation of Rule 6 may be punished as a contempt of court.
Subsection (e)(3)(D) provides for notice to be given when there is a petition for disclosure under (e)(3)(C)(ii). The petitioner is required to serve notice of his petition on those persons who are recognized as entitled to appear and be heard on the matter. The notice requirement ensures that all interested parties, if they wish, may make a timely appearance. Generally, the attorney for the State is entitled to be heard so that he may represent the public interest in secrecy, including the State's legitimate concern about the possible effect on the functioning of future grand juries of unduly liberal disclosure. The notice requirement is inapplicable if the hearing is to be ex parte, which is allowed when the hearing involves an application for a court order by the State, so as to preserve, to the maximum extent possible, grand jury secrecy. The rule provides only that the hearing "may" be ex parte when the petitioner is the State, which allows the court to decide that matter based on the circumstances of the particular case.
Subdivisions (e)(5) and (e)(6), like the federal rule, provide for closed hearings and sealed records where necessary to prevent improper disclosure of matters occurring before a grand jury during preindictment proceedings, such as hearings concerning a decision to grant a grand jury witness immunity or to compel a grand jury witness to comply with the terms of a subpoena.
Language formerly in subdivision (f) has been deleted because it does not reflect current grand jury practice within the state.
Reporter's Notes to 1999 Amendment to Rule 6
Subdivision (e) has been rewritten. The changes are primarily in form, but several new subsections provide explicit exceptions to the general rule of secrecy regarding grand jury proceedings.
Subdivision (e)(3)(A)(ii) allows an attorney for the State to disclose grand jury proceedings to government personnel (including federal personnel) deemed necessary by an attorney for the State to assist an attorney for the State in the performance of his duties. The rule is similar to the federal rule and is necessary for the investigation and preparation of some more complex criminal cases. Federal and state authorities cooperate in organized crime and racketeering investigations, in public corruption and major fraud cases, and in various other situations where federal and state criminal jurisdictions overlap. Government attorneys in complex grand jury investigations frequently find it necessary to enlist the help of a team of government agents and experts. While the agents are usually state personnel, in certain types of investigations an attorney for the State may wish to obtain the assistance of federal law enforcement personnel.
The disclosure permitted is limited. It is permissible only in connection with the attorney for the State's "duty to enforce criminal law" and only to those personnel "deemed necessary. . .to assist" in the performance of that duty. Under subdivision (e)(3)(B), the material disclosed may not be used for any other purpose, and the names of persons to whom disclosure is made must be promptly provided to the court. The attorney for the State is also charged with the responsibility of certifying to the court that he or she has advised those persons to whom disclosure was made under (e)(3)(A)(ii) of their obligation of secrecy under Rule 6.
Subdivision (e)(3)(C)(i) specifically recognizes that an attorney for the State may turn over grand jury transcripts under Rule 16 when the defendant requests discovery. Subdivision (e)(3)(C)(iv) recognizes that it is permissible for the attorney for the State to make disclosure of matters occurring before one grand jury to another state grand jury. Subdivision (e)(3)(C)(v) covers the situation where, during a state grand jury investigation, evidence is developed which suggests a violation of federal law. The subdivision allows a court to permit disclosure to a federal official for the purpose of enforcing federal law when an attorney for the State so requests and makes the requisite showing.
The provision formerly found in Rule 6(e) that "[n]o obligation of secrecy may be imposed upon any person except in accordance with this rule," has been deleted as a result of section 12-11.1-5.1 of the Rhode Island Code, which punishes "unlawful grand jury disclosure." Subdivision (e)(2) specifically provides that a knowing violation of Rule 6 may be punished as a contempt of court.
Subsection (e)(3)(D) provides for notice to be given when there is a petition for disclosure under (e)(3)(C)(ii). The petitioner is required to serve notice of his petition on those persons who are recognized as entitled to appear and be heard on the matter. The notice requirement ensures that all interested parties, if they wish, may make a timely appearance. Generally, the attorney for the State is entitled to be heard so that he may represent the public interest in secrecy, including the State's legitimate concern about the possible effect on the functioning of future grand juries of unduly liberal disclosure. The notice requirement is inapplicable if the hearing is to be ex parte, which is allowed when the hearing involves an application for a court order by the State, so as to preserve, to the maximum extent possible, grand jury secrecy. The rule provides only that the hearing "may" be ex parte when the petitioner is the State, which allows the court to decide that matter based on the circumstances of the particular case.
Subdivisions (e)(5) and (e)(6), like the federal rule, provide for closed hearings and sealed records where necessary to prevent improper disclosure of matters occurring before a grand jury during preindictment proceedings, such as hearings concerning a decision to grant a grand jury witness immunity or to compel a grand jury witness to comply with the terms of a subpoena.
Language formerly in subdivision (f) has been deleted because it does not reflect current grand jury practice within the State.
1972 Notes
Subdivision (a) differs from its federal counterpart in two principal respects. First, it does not contain provisions governing the times when grand juries are to be convened. The General Laws contain controlling provisions governing this aspect of criminal practice in the Superior Court. G.L. 1956 (1969 Reenactment), §§ 12-11-2 through 12-11-4. Second, subdivision (a) provides that thirteen jurors are the minimum number of jurors required to constitute a grand jury, rather than sixteen as under the Federal Rule. Again, this retains existing statutory requirements which are based upon common law standards. G.L. 1956 (1969 Reenactment), § 12-11-1.
Subdivision (b) is essentially the same as its federal counterpart. Paragraph (1), which authorizes a challenge to either the array or qualifications of a juror before the jury is sworn, has no express counterpart in the General Laws. It differs from the federal rule by not permitting the array to be challenged on the ground that it was improperly "summoned." Although paragraph (2), which authorizes a defendant to attack an indictment because either the jury was improperly selected or jurors lacked the qualifications to serve, is in accord with Rhode Island practice, it does modify the existing rule that if a single juror was not legally qualified the indictment will be quashed. See State v. Edwards, 89 R.I. 378, 383, 153 A.2d 153, 157 (1959). Under the rule the indictment is not to be quashed even though one or more jurors were not qualified if at least twelve qualified jurors voted to return the indictment.
Subdivision (c) differs from its federal counterpart by not requiring the foreman to sign indictments on behalf of the jury or to keep a record of the number of jurors concurring in the finding of each indictment. Under subdivision (f) each juror who votes to return an indictment is to sign the indictment, thereby rendering it unnecessary to make and file the separate record required under the federal rule.
Subdivision (d) is essentially the same as the federal rule and accords with existing Rhode Island practice.
Subdivision (e) is essentially the same as its federal counterpart with two additions. The first sentence was added to permit, but not require, stenographic or other records to be made of grand jury proceedings upon request of the Attorney General. See G.L. 1956 (1969 Reenactment), § 8-5-6. At present, such records are made only in Providence County.
The other addition, which is taken from the Maine Rules of Criminal Procedure, requires the court to impound any grand jury records of proceedings in which indictments are not returned.
The requirements for secrecy of grand jury proceedings imposed under this subdivision comport generally with existing Rhode Island procedure. Similarly, the authorization for sealed indictments, although not provided for by statute, accords with existing practice for "secret" indictments.
Subdivision (f) is the same as its federal counterpart with three additions. First, each grand juror who concurs in finding a true bill is required to sign the indictment. Second, when a foreman reports that an indictment has not been returned, the Attorney General is required to report this fact to the District Court so that it can discharge the defendant and clear its docket of the matter. The requirement that the foreman's written report of no true bill be made "forthwith," means by the end of the same day during which the grand jury reached this determination; thus, reports of no true bill are not to be withheld until the end of the grand jury's term. Finally, if the Attorney General fails to present a charge against a defendant to a grand jury to which the defendant has been bound over by the time that grand jury completes its labors and renders its final report, the Attorney General is required to report that fact in writing to the Superior Court and to the appropriate division of the District Court so that the defendant can be discharged. For the purpose of this rule, the Attorney General is deemed to have "presented" a matter when proof of the charge has been placed before the grand jury and it has voted on the question of whether to return an indictment.
Subdivision (g) differs from the federal rule by omission of the provision for a specific, maximum period of service for grand juries and the provision that they serve until discharged by the court. The final sentence, which permits impaneling replacement jurors, is new to Rhode Island practice. In all other respects the subdivision reflects existing Rhode Island law. G.L. 1956 (1969 Reenactment), §§ 12-11-2 and 12-11-3. The rule is not intended to alter the restriction imposed by the Rhode Island Constitution that no more than one grand jury may function at any time in a county In re Opinion to the Governor, 62 R.I. 200, 206-12, 4 A.2d 487, 489-92(1939).