Opinion ID: 774103
Heading Depth: 4
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Securing a Grand Jury Indictment

Text: 45 Milstein alleges that Appellees posed as advisors before the grand jury when in reality they were complaining witnesses. Before the grand jury the prosecutor has the dual role of pressing for an indictment and of being the grand jury adviser. In case of conflict, the latter duty must take precedence. United States v. Williams, 504 U.S. 36, 63 (1992) (Stevens, J., dissenting) (quotation omitted). If Cooley and Foltz were advising rather than advocating, they could arguably not be entitled to absolute immunity. However, Milstein does not argue that Appellees were actually functioning as advisors rather than advocates. Instead, he suggests that Appellees, while actually pressing for an indictment, gave the misleading impression to the grand jury that they were merely neutral advisors. 46 Because using a grand jury is one way of initiating a prosecution, Imbler, at 431, any acts of a prosecutor before a grand jury could arguably be covered by absolute immunity. See Herb Hallman Chevrolet, 169 F.3d at 643 (prosecutors are absolutely immune from liability under §§ 1983 for their conduct before grand juries) (quoting Burns , 500 U.S. at 490 n.6); Fields v. Soloff, 920 F.2d 1114, 1120 (2d Cir. 1990) (affording absolute immunity to prosecutor who oversaw confiscation of material from grand jury that was attempting to initiate an indictment sua sponte). However, because grand juries can be empaneled for investigative purposes, well before probable cause exists, see Williams, 504 U.S. at 48, such a proposition seemingly runs afoul of Buckley's rule that a prosecutor cannot function as an advocate before probable cause exists. 47 We need not determine the exact scope of protection afforded by absolute immunity for acts performed by prosecutors before grand juries. Milstein's allegations as to this particular grand jury focus on Appellee's efforts to indict, not to investigate a crime. Initiating a prosecution has consistently been identified as a function within the prosecutor's role as advocate. See Imbler, 424 U.S. at 431; Mishler v. Clift, 191 F.3d 998, 1008 (9th Cir. 1999) (Filing charges and initiating prosecution are functions that are integral to a prosecutor's work.) Accordingly, Appellees' functions before this grand jury are protected by absolute immunity. 48