Case Name: The People of the State of New York, Plaintiff, v. David Proskey, Defendant
Court: New York Court of General Sessions of the Peace
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1900-08
Citations: 32 Misc. 367
Docket Number: 
Parties: The People of the State of New York, Plaintiff, v. David Proskey, Defendant.
Judges: 
Reporter: New York Miscellaneous Reports
Volume: 32
Pages: 367–368

Head Matter:
The People of the State of New York, Plaintiff, v. David Proskey, Defendant.
(Court of General Sessions of the Peace, in and for the city and county of New York,
August, 1900.)
Grand jury — Minutes not to be inspected where there has been a preliminary examination.
Where the defendant has had a preliminary examination before a committing magistrate and has been then and there represented by counsel, he must be considered to have been fully advised of the
charge made against him, and consequently the court, in its discretion, will not allow him to inspect and copy the minutes of a grand jury by which he was subsequently indicted upon the same charge.
Application for leave to inspect and take a copy of the minutes of the grand jury.
H. B. Closson, for motion.
Asa Bird Gardiner, District Attorney, opposed.

Opinion:
Foster, J.
This is an application for leave to inspect and take a copy of the minutes of the grand jury in this case. The indictment is for " criminally receiving stolen property ". The defendant was arraigned before the committing magistrate, pleaded not guilty, and demanded an examination, which was had at length, and at which both the defendant and the complainant were represented by counsel. The defendant was held and subsequently indicted. It is entirely within the discretion of the court to permit or deny an inspection of the minutes of the grand jury. People v. Molineux, 27 Misc. Rep. 60, and cases cited. It appears, however, to be, both upon principle and authority, the practice of this court to permit an inspection of the minutes of the grand jury, in a proper case, only, where there has been no preliminary examination before the committing magistrate. The reasons for denying such inspection, where such examination has been had, appear to me so strong that I regret that I cannot grant this application, for otherwise the peculiar facts alleged would seem to entirely justify such an order. The defendant cannot be prejudiced by such ruling; he is fully advised of the charges against him by the preliminary examination; and any motion which he desires to make may be made at the trial, as well as before it. True, he may be put to the trouble and expense of preparing for, and going to, trial, but that is the necessary, even if unfortunate, consequence of an indictment regularly found.
Motion denied.