Opinion ID: 1277746
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Federal Criminal Complaints

Text: W.Va.R.Crim.P. 3 is the same as Rule 3 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. Fed.R.Crim.P. 3 provides: Rule 3. The Complaint. The complaint is a written statement of the essential facts constituting the offense charged. It shall be made upon oath before a magistrate. On the federal level, because the prosecution of criminal cases is controlled by the United States in federal courts, there has been a great reluctance to allow private citizens to file a criminal complaint. Connecticut Action Now, Inc. v. Roberts Plating Co., 457 F.2d 81 (2d Cir.1972) (in federal system, crimes are always prosecuted by federal government, not by private citizens); New York v. Muka, 440 F.Supp. 33 (N.D.N.Y.1977) (private citizen has no right to prosecute a federal crime); United States v. Bryson, 434 F.Supp. 986 (W.D.Okla.1977) (prosecution of criminal actions in federal courts is a matter solely within the discretion of the Attorney General of the United States and duly authorized United States Attorneys, and private citizens have no right to institute such criminal procedures); United States v. Panza, 381 F.Supp. 1133 (W.D.Pa.1974) (private citizen is not entitled to file complaint before a United States Magistrate); 1 Charles Alan Wright, Federal Practice and Procedure, Criminal 2d § 42 (1982). Usually, if a private citizen seeks to file a complaint, the magistrate refers the matter to the United States Attorney. Pugach v. Klein, 193 F.Supp. 630 (S.D.N.Y.1961); 1 Mark S. Rhodes, Orfield's Criminal Procedure Under the Federal Rules § 3:7 (2d ed. 1985). In United States ex rel. Savage v. Arnold, 403 F.Supp. 172, 174 (E.D.Pa.1975), [6] the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania explained that the role of the federal government in enforcing criminal statutes and prosecuting criminal cases necessitates the preclusion of criminal complaints by private citizens: The courts that have faced the issue have concluded that the essential role of the government (i.e. the U.S. Attorney) in the prosecution of criminal violations must of necessity preclude complaints by private citizens. See, Keenan v. McGrath, 328 F.2d 610 (1st Cir.1964); Pugach v. Klein, 193 F.Supp. 630, 637 (S.D.N.Y.1961). Rather than permit private complaints to be filed, it has been suggested that such matters be referred to the United States Attorney. Brown v. Duggan, supra, [329 F.Supp. 207] at 210 [(W.D.Pa.1971)]. In fact, this is the specific practice recommended by the Judicial Conference of the United States: `In all cases ... where a private citizen complains, it is a good practice, since the burden of prosecution will fall on the United States Attorney's office, that the complainant should be referred to the United States Attorney before a complaint is filed, at least in absence of an emergency requiring immediate action of the commissioner.' Manual for United States Commissioners, 5 (1948). (footnote omitted). Finally, another reason to preclude a private citizen from filing criminal complaints at the federal level was succinctly stated by the District Court for the Northern District of New York in Muka: [A] criminal prosecution is brought on behalf of the United States as a whole, rather than to vindicate private rights[.] 440 F.Supp. at 36. Thus, our review of federal court decisions reveals an overwhelming preference at the federal level to preclude private citizens from filing criminal complaints because of the controlling role of the United States Attorneys in prosecuting federal criminal cases.