Opinion ID: 1708076
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 8

Heading: FOIA and Federal Criminal Discovery

Text: Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 16 regulates discovery in federal criminal proceedings. A federal criminal defendant who elects to participate in discovery [3] incurs a reciprocal discovery obligation. Fed.R.Crim.P. 16(b)(1). For its part, FOIA represents a general philosophy of full agency disclosure unless information is exempted under clearly delineated statutory language. United States Dep't of Defense v. Federal Labor Relations Auth., 510 U.S. 487, 494, 114 S.Ct. 1006, 127 L.Ed.2d 325 (1994). At the same time, numerous federal courts have made clear that FOIA is not intended ... to serve as a substitute for criminal discovery, which is governed by [Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure] 16. 9 Lawyers Cooperative Publishing, Federal Procedure § 22:1090 (Thomas R. Trenker et al., eds.1993) (citation omitted); Fruehauf Corp. v. Thornton, 507 F.2d 1253, 1254 (6th Cir.1974). The same holds true for civil litigation. See, e.g., Metex Corp. v. ACS Industries, Inc., 748 F.2d 150, 155 (3d Cir.1984) (observing that FOIA ... is a public disclosure statute and is not intended to replace or supplement the discovery of private litigants) (citing NLRB v. Sears, Roebuck & Co., 421 U.S. 132, 143 n. 10, 95 S.Ct. 1504, 44 L.Ed.2d 29 (1975)). The federal case most directly on point is United States v. Murdock, 548 F.2d 599 (5th Cir.1977). There, the defendant was convicted of willfully failing to file federal income tax returns for three years. Although admitting the failure to file tax returns, the defendant moved to quash the indictment on grounds of selective and discriminatory prosecution. In conjunction with his motion, Murdock requested discovery of numerous government documents. The trial court allowed Murdock to see some of the requested documents but denied access to other material. Id. at 600. The Fifth Circuit affirmed on appeal. While recognizing that FOIA's purpose was to provide greater public access to records of the Government agencies, id. at 601, the court found nothing in the Act's text or its legislative history to support the proposition that it was intended to enlarge the scope of discovery under the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. Id. The court reasoned that [s]ince Congress has the power to regulate the practice and procedures in the federal courts, had Congress intended to amend the explicit discovery procedures set forth in Rule 16 by enactment of the FOIA, it undoubtedly could have done so. Id. at 602 (citations omitted). Accordingly, the Fifth Circuit held that the discovery provisions of rule 16 and FOIA provide two independent schemes for obtaining information through the judicial process. Id. Although conceding that government information obtained through FOIA may be useful in a criminal trial, id., [4] the court ultimately determined that FOIA was not intended as a device to delay ongoing litigation or to enlarge the scope of discovery beyond that already provided by the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. Id.