Legal Document

360 U.S. 395 79 Supreme Court Reporter 1237 3 United States Reports Lawyer’s Edition 2d Series KF101.8 U54 1323 PITTSBURGH PLATE GLASS COMPANY, Petitioner,v.UNITED STATES of America. GALAX MIRROR Inc, et al., Petitioners, versus UNITED Nos. 489, 491. Argued April 28, 29, 1959. Decided June 22, Rehearing Denied Oct. 12, See 80 42. Mr. Leland Hazard, Pittsburgh, Pa., for petitioner Pittsburgh Plate glass co. or Haw. Hawai‘i KFH45 A2 Graham Morison, Washington, D.C., petitioners Galax Mirror company al. Philip Elman, respondent. Justice CLARK delivered the opinion Court. 1 Petitioners stand convicted on a single-count indictment charging conspiracy under § Sherman Act, 15 Code Annotated KF65 U5 1. They contend that trial judge erred in refusing to permit them inspect grand jury minutes covering testimony before body key government witness at trial. The Appeals affirmed convictions, 260 Federal Reporter, 2nd 397. With reference present claim, it held Rule 6(e) Rules Criminal Procedure, 18 U.S.C.A.,1 committed inspection not sound discretion judge, and this instance, no abuse had been shown. We granted certiorari limited question posed by ruling. 358 917, 289, 237. conclude circumstances case court did err make Jonas' available use cross-examination. 2 returned named as defendants seven corporations, all manufacturers mirrors, three their officers. However, only corporations are here, slong with one individual, Judge Atlantic Messer, Sr. charged fix price plain plate mirrors sold interestate commerce. It is necessary our purposes detail facts long trial, record which covers 860 pages. sufficient say Government proved its through 10 witnesses, last wom was Jonas. He President large North Carolina mirror manufacturing reputation independence industry. Although neither he nor his corporation indicted, latter made co-conspirator. evidence indicates consummated two meetings successive days during week annual meeting Manufacturers Association 1954 Asheville, Carolina. Jonas, being member Association, attend convention. Talk convention regarding prices culminated telephone calls several representatives Jonas concerning attitude raising prices. On day following these participants met an inn away from headquarters discussed 'prices.' Within thereafter each announced idential increase, approximately percent. testimony, course, confined where understanding finalized. admits 'important' witness. proof overwhelming aside testimony. While who characterized outcome 'agreement' prices, negatived conclusion lists followed were little less than positive. After defense counsel interrogated him number times appeared subject jury. Upon ascertaining testified 'the same general matter,' moved delivery minutes. stated 'a right * Grand Jury after has completed direct examination' relating matter' testimony.2 As authority automatic transcripts' such cited Jencks States, 1957, 353 657, 77 1007, 1103. previously indicated, motion denied. 4 appears us clear supra, nowise controlling here. nothing do proceedings language intended encompass Likewise, equally Congress exclude those operation so-called 71 Statutes-at-Large 595, KF62 (Supp. V, 1958) 3500, 3500.3 5 concede, they must, any disclosure covered Fed.Rules Crim.Proc. promulgated 1946 approval Congress. In fact, federal courts well Courts have nearly unanimous judge.4 Our cases announce principle,5 but declaratory it.6 recently Term we used 'to impeach witness, refresh recollection test credibility like' instances 'particularized need secrecy lifted discretely limitedly.' Procter & Gamble, 1958, 356 677, 683, 78 983, 987, 1077. 6 argue, however, judge's must be exercised accordance rationale Jencks; namely, upon showing cross-examination jury—and more—the 'right' witness' 7 This conclusion, runs counter long-established policy' secrecy, page 681, 986, older Nation itself. reasons therefor manifold, id., 682, compelling when viewed light history modus operandi Its establishment Constitution 'as sole method preferring charges serious criminal cases' indeed 'shows high place (holds) instrument justice.' Costello 1956, 350 359, 362, 76 406, 408, 100 L.Ed. Ever since action Fathers, American jury, like England, 'has convened laymen, free technical rules, acting secret, pledged indict because prejudice special favor.' Ibid. Indeed, indictments may hearsay, matter, even knowledge jurors themselves. Id., pages 363, 409. To public part would inevitably detract efficacy. act required accusatory inquisitorial body. Moreover, participation curtailed, parsimonious if knew soon hands accused. Especially true antitrust fear business reprisal might haunt both juror And 'go slow' sign continue realistically time theretofore. 8 does follow, should never defense. there occasions, see exercise order produced Certainly 'disclosure wholly proper ends justice require it.' Socony-Vacuum Oil Co., 310 234, 60 849. 9 burden, show particularized need' exists outweighs policy secrecy. read failed whatever contended transcript dealt matter generally indicate contradiction between Such preliminary not, necessary. colloquy refer requirement, denial based breadth petitioners' claim. also claim error examine himself inconsistencies. But consider problem request judge. apparently view ria l requested absolutely so. here Second Circuit reached contrary conclusion. Spangelet, 258 338. Be may, resolution await issue presented record. short invoke asserted supposed absolute right, hold have. judgment therefore affirmed. Affirmed. 11 BRENNAN, whom CHIEF JUSTICE, BLACK DOUGLAS join, dissenting. 12 words Appeals, Government's 'principal prosecuting witness.'1 Lenoir Company, participant alleged price-fixing conspiracy, indicted. examination asked production relevant immediately intention grant motion: 'Unless you can some basis contradicts what happened room N Dec. Immigration Nationality Decisions am going records. easy attorney get access records just making here.' Defense protested, 'we attempting that. want subjects examination.' (Emphasis supplied.) thus encompassed replied, 'You ask denying your Plainly asking entire proceedings, unless Their carefully so much 'covered substance 'lifted limitedly,' 1077, necessarily implied turn over parts dealing posture, then, decision narrow whether dissent Court's affirmance ruling circumscribed request. 13 is, end maintained serve particular ends. will advantages gained outweighed countervailing interest disclosure, lited , circumstance further fair administration justice. McNabb 318 332, 63 608, 87 819. without good reason, too late say, practical insist possible accused crystal none peasons justifying present. '(A)fter jury's functions ended, 150, 811, 849, 84 1129. Thus defendant committing perjury could adequately prepare defense, Remington, Cir., 191 246; Rose, 215 617, inconsistency Alper, 156 222; Burton 175 960; Herzog 226 561; H.J.K. Theatre Corp., 236 502. occasion itself recognized fairness permitting witnesses though considered bound so, Grunewald, 162 F.Supp. 621. discoverable civil suit instituted need,' 1077.3 Nor overlook uses own interests litigation. standard practice attorneys preparing 678, 984, refreshing 233, 1129, and, arises, impeaching Cotter, 689. Of ordinarly entitled 1129; Procedure recognizes appropriate circumstances.4 14 agrees compelled precedents, states "a secrecy.' pays lip service principle result case. beyond question, think, application requires holding extent sought. Since valid considerations militate favor case, simple given portions opportunity refute Essentially four advanced justification secrecy.5 (1) prevent escaping indicted arrested tampering against him. (2) derogatory information (3) encourage complainants come speak freely thereby subjecting discomfort retaliation. (4) engage uninhibited investigation deliberation barring votes comments proceedings. 16 None dictates sought, kept secret. Court, while obeisance makes how serves stage enable escape custody tamper already examination. Certainly, also, protection innocent bearing Discovery sought condemned someone concealed creates very situation imperative assess adhere standards set ourselves assure courts. Similarly, ground produce apprehended results retaliation induce reluctance others testify juries. taken open defendants. His extremely damaging. Disclosure hardly likely embarrassment produced. 'If tells truth, truth former cannot possibly bring harm tend produce.' Wigmore, Evidence (3d ed. 1940), 2362, Page 725. Witnesses know once called remain secret informants quite apart discoverable. Finally, seeks disclose opinions involved All If questions intertwined jurors' embarrassing them, names excised. Cf. 17 Plainly, reason appears. insistence exalts secrecy's sake face obvious seriously damaging Surely 'Justice less,' 669, 1013, 1103, permitted every reasonable conviction untruthful inaccurate witnesses. prosecution, emphasized, 'is shall win done.' Berger 295 78, 88, 55 629, 633, 1314. Obviously impeachment prior inconsistent contradictory statements oath important effect somehow exists. analogous pointed out folly requiring previous obtain statements. said offers determine fact Jencks: 19 'Requiring first conflict reports actually deny material determining arise until testified, conflict, Gordon, (Gordon 344 414, 73 369, 97 447) helpless discover inspecting reports. A requirement clearly incompatible rejected.' 667—668, 1013. 20 lay down agents obviously apply equal force For rarely able foundation obtaining recognition holds today suggested Government, rather cross-examination, portions, any, considers useful impeachment. procedure sometimes een utilized past way limit discovery Consolidated Laundries, 159 860. disadvantages expressly disapproved it. said: 21 'Flat version events inconsistency. omission related contrast emphasis facts, different treatment, cross-examining process testing 22 '* decide Because equipped effective purpose discrediting furthering accused's initially them. less.' U.S., 667—669, 23 From admission effectively certainly regard FBI Jencks. often lengthy involved, difficult most experienced pressures conducting pick task satisfied Then utilize deem advisable best interests, course applicable rules evidence. 24 reverse new failure 'Rule 6. Jury. '(e) Secrecy Proceedings Disclosure. matters occurring other deliberations vote performance duties. Otherwise juror, attorney, interpreter stenographer directed preliminarily connection judicial proceeding grounds exist dismiss No obligation imposed person except rule. bail, event clerk seal finding issuance execution warrant summons.' included 'subjects' contested. S.Rep. Number 981, 85th Cong., 1st Sess.; 103 Cong.Rec. 15933. E.g., 338; Angelet, 255 383; 629; Schmidt 115 394; Amercan Medical Ass'n., 26 429. 1940, Gamble 1077; Johnson, 1943, 319 503, 513, 1233, 1238, 1546. Notes Advisory Committee Rules, 6, agreed uniform increase. Furthermore, Inc., follow pricing regardless did. instrumental connecting Glass pricefixing agreement. points out, affected statute, U.S.C.(Supp. V) 3500. relies, because, unlike concerned demand pretrial preparation suit. concerns prosecution. specifically Gamble: 'We reach problems recollection, like. Those 987. 222, 226; re Bullock, F.upp . 639. 628—629; Amazon Industrial Chemical 254, 261; 2360.

Classification Label: 0