I have been informed by our local district clerk that they will no longer issue any subpoena that contains the name of a juvenile--whether it be for school records, medical records, etc.. Evidently it doesn't matter if the subpoena concerns a witness, victim, or is a duces tecum.

Has anyone else encountered such a problem? By what authority is the name of a juvenile confidential. I am, of course aware, of the pseudonym provision concerning sexual assault victims.

Evidently, the clerks office is okay with using the initials of the minor--but my question is how does the recipient of the subpoena know how to comply without the full identity--especially in the case of a subpoena duces tecum for school records or medical records?

Am I just totally missing something here?

Different counties do it different ways for juvenile defendants but I know of no reason to do it for witnesses.

I'll have to say I think the better practice is to issue the subs for juvi defendant's with just the initials. I mean we have to bend over backwards to keep the juvi's confidentiality and then send subs to all the witnesses with his/her full name on them, doesn't really seem to fall in line with all the other confidential procedures we go through.

I agree though it does make it tough for some witnesses to figure out what you want especially for the duces tecums. I generally put my name and number or my investigators info on the duces so the witness can call if they have questions. The school should already know as they should have gotten a 15.27 letter when the kid got into trouble !

Juvi's info is confidential under 58.007 and 58.005 of the family code but again that is only for juvi defendants. I know of nothing similar for other juvis, but if you find out would love to know.

I don't know of any law (or reason) to keep the name of any witness in a subpoena confidential. That just doesn't make sense, even if the person is a juvenile. And for a juvenile witness, you have to put the name of the parent/guardian and order them to bring the juvenile, so how much of a secret is that? Not to mention the whole discovery/due process issue.

Always seems like some official somewhere decides to go off on a tangent and declare some new policy that is without support in the law. It's what keeps us busy.

Lee, I would sit down with your District Clerk and explain that you know of no law which supports their position. Ask them to provide you with the legal basis for their position so you can "learn something." When they're unable to do so, I would compliment them on their attempt to maintain the confidentiality of juvs and then explain the considerable difficulties created by their position. Then ask them to change their position and policy. If all of that doesn't work, I would discuss it with your district judge(s) and explain the difficulties to him/her/them. Of course, the greatest difficulty in their mind will be the inevitable continuances and probable docket backlog. Most of the district clerks that I have dealt with over the years pretty much feel that district judges are just a tad below (if not equal to) our Lord. The last resort would be a mandamus but that won't be pretty...