Opinion ID: 76461
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 6

Heading: Stay of Grand Jury Disclosure

Text: 23 After the district court ordered wholesale disclosure of all grand jury transcripts by February 10, 2003, the government filed a motion to stay the immediate public disclosure pending appeal. 12 The government emphasized that the Aisenbergs would not suffer injury from a stay because they had obtained a dismissal of the indictment against them and an unprecedented amount of attorney's fees under the Hyde Amendment without access to or any need for the grand jury materials. The government also stressed that this serious crime remained unsolved and disclosure would interfere with its ongoing investigation. 13 24 In reply, the Aisenbergs objected to any stay and emphasized that they needed the grand jury material to support their civil lawsuit against the lawyers and law enforcement personnel responsible for the bad faith, vexatious and frivolous prosecution of the Aisenbergs. See Aisenberg v. Hillsborough County Sheriff's Office, No. 8:03-CV-2063-7-23EAJ (M.D.Fla.2003). 14 The Aisenbergs cited Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 6(e)(3)(C)(i)(I), which permits disclosure of grand jury material when so directed by a court preliminarily to or in connection with a judicial proceeding. Fed.R.Crim.P. 6(e)(3)(C)(i)(I) (2002). 15 The Aisenbergs further challenged the viability of any continuing criminal investigation 16 and asserted that much of the information presented before the grand jury was already public, leaving few, if any, justifications for non-disclosure. 25 On May 5, 2003, the district court entered an order rejecting the government's request for a stay pending appeal. 17 In that order, the court concluded, inter alia, that the government's putative `investigation' is entitled to no weight in the decision regarding the stay, and that there is apparently no meaningful investigation to endanger. The district court stated that the Aisenbergs were prejudiced by the continued secrecy and that their public exoneration and the pursuit of rights they assert against the United States are impaired by continuing non-disclosure. 26 The government then moved in this Court for a stay of disclosure of the grand jury transcripts pending appeal, which was granted on June 26, 2003.