Here is an interesting question for which I am having trouble finding a definitive answer. Clearly, what transpires in the grand jury is secret. However, what about the record of presentments that the grand jury makes when they hand down indictments? Our grand jury maintains a large book in which each indictment presented is recorded along with the defendant's name and the action taken by the grand jury. I believe it also includes the grand jury's vote. Is this public record? If so, where does it say that? Article 20.22 of the Code of Criminal Procedure requires that indictments presented be recorded in the "minutes of the court" (but must be delayed where the defendant is not in custody or on bond). Is this the same as the "minutes of the grand jury?" Of course, the indictments themselves are public record. I have found one case, Stern v. State ex rel Ansel, 869 S.W.2d 614, which says: "The requirement of secrecy should be imposed only to the extent that it contributes to the effectiveness of the grand jury as that institution carries out its investigative and screening functions; beyond that, the requirement of confidentiality serves no purpose." It occurs to me that the recording of the actions that the grand jury has taken is not a part of the investigative or screening function of the grand jury. So the bottom line questions are: 1) what are the "minutes of the grand jury"; 2) Is the log book kept by grand juries the same as the "minutes of the grand jury" and 3) Are they public record or are they subject to the secrecy provisions of the grand jury? (I know that the Open Records Act does not apply to the grand jury). Any one have any ideas?

I am fairly sure the minutes are not public some time ago I ran across an old one that made interesting reading but felt I could not talk about it even though most of the parties are likely deceased. The book is the the minutes.

I'm not sure why, but I have always treated the Grand Jury book as the minutes and have considered them public. I think this was just the way I was taught. I have understood that there is even a question as to "when" the secrecy requirement on Grand Jury proceedings may (or may not) end. I have always treated it as permanent requirement

I have never considered any action by the grand jury to be public, and I certainly wouldn't include actual votes in any minutes.

The minutes are the clerk's reflection of the true bills handed down by a grand jury. That would mean the list of names along with offenses indicted. Those minutes don't even become public until a defendant has been arrested.

There is no requirement of a record of no bills. There is no requirement of a record of votes, except that kept informally by the grand jury during the course of their work. The ultimate public record of a vote for a true bill is the signature of a foreman at the bottom of an indictment.

We shred any notes or records of the grand jury at the conclusion of each term. That secures the secrecy of the grand jury. What would be the purpose of keeping some big book with all the stuff from the grand jury?

The only information kept in our GJ minute book is the defendant's name, the offense investigated (as best known) the approximate date of the offense, the names of any witnesses with thier agency or city of residence and the action taken. No record of actual votes or "splits" are in the minutes. We do include records of no bills. And I have included information concerning GJ members who have excused themselves from hearing particular cases. No other information is included. Due to the reletive sparce nature of the minutes and the fact that they are the "courts" minutes, I treat them as public record. As for any other documentation generated such as Grand juror notes, dockets etc, those are collected at the end of each session and destroyed.

We shred everything the grand jurors ever wrote on, whether case-related, or not. We keep a list of all the cases presented to the grand jury and record whether each is true-billed, no-billed, or passed. An official copy of this list is sent to the district clerk's office along with the indictments and from that, the district courts make their arraignment dockets. The district clerk's office hand-writes the cause numbers on the list once cause numbers are assigned to each newly-indicted case. We do not keep a big book of grand jury stuff. I keep a copy of the list of cases presented from day to day and it shows who testified and the result of the grand jury vote - nothing else. I instruct the foreman not to tell me the vote count, just what is true-billed & what is no-billed.

My understanding of the secrecy is that, factual information relative to the cases presented is secret. Anything the grand jurors discussed among themselves in deliberations is secret. Who voted how on each case is secret.

I think the following are not secret:
- result of the vote (true-bill, no-bill, pass);
- testimony of the target of investigation;
- names of witnesses appearing before grand jury.

Some of this only seems to be accessible upon request by an appropriate party.

As many of the other offices do, Smith County provides each member of the grand jury with an agenda. The agenda has the name, address, identifiers, charge, bond amount, bond status as information. All that information is public. Most members appear to use them in taking notes of the cases presented. The foreman of the grand jury uses his to record true bills, no bills and passes as well as the names of witnesses who testify. After the votes, he/she records the TB, NB etc and both the foreman and "clerk" of the grand jury initial each of them. Obvioculsy they are not recorded like 12-0 or 9-3, just a TB, NB or pass. This group of agendas for the term become the minutes of the grand jury. The D.A.'s office keeps the book until the conclusion of the term when it is turned over to the District Clerk, and can be reviewed after the term is completed. This record, due to clerical error or the hectic pace of some grand jury sessions could be the only place where witnesses names are recorded since many (officers) witnesses are not routinely transcribed, and occasionally someone does not put a witness name on the file or in the coimputer system.

Like everyone else, the notes, etc from the individual members are shredded after each session.

It also saved me once upon a time during my first session as the grand jury prosecutor when I mistakenly handed an indictment to the foreman, who signed it, when in fact the case had been no billed.

On a related note, and as a current defense attorney, what are the views of everyone out there on the commissioner system in selecting the grand jury. Most counties in East Texas use it, with no real problems. However, I have seen an article very critical of the Harris County implementation claiming that a number of commissioners are probation officers, court personnel, bailiffs etc with the result of a number of law enforcement serving on grand juries. There was also criticism of an apparent lack of Hispanic members, just based on a surname analysis. As a side note, I have a good friend who has been asked several times if she wants to serve on a Harris COunty grand jury, presumably due to her involvement in the local Republican Party. I had dismissed the claims that "I can get you on a grand jury" because I was under the impression that judges everywhere select the commissioners throughout the county. Any thoughts?

How is testimony not secret? Doesn't the law require a court order before it can be disclosed?

I mean that the defendant can get a transcript/recording of his own grand jury testimony.

Our judges used to routinely appoint grand jury commissioners, but now none of them do. It's all jury pool. I cannot say that I've noticed any difference in the temperaments, or make-up of the grand juries, other than we don't have a lot of folks living within a few blocks of each other serving together any more. One time, when it was commission, I had like 6 grand jurors who all lived in a 3-mile radius, it seemed. For years now, with the pool system in place, it only happens occasionally that grand jurors know each other prior to service.

A number of years ago, we experimented with the "jury wheel" system of selecting Grand Jurors. It was a disaster. We actually ended up with a defendant (Drug delivery case) and a drug dealer's brother on two separate grand juries. I had to hold off on over 70 sealed indictments for almost six months till the drug dealer was off. We went back to the commissioner system shortly after that.

I thought a person under indictment, or convicted of any felony was ineligible to serve on grand jury.

I once asked a judge to remove a grand juror for not being of good moral character. He met all the other requirements, but was convicted of misdemeanor indecent exposure prior to his summons. I looked at the old case & it was not a matter of some guy urinating in public & unintentionally exposing himself. The guy was a weenie-waver, but his victims were adults. I brought this to the judge's attention. The judge then had me drag the grand juror to his chambers, where the judge expressed doubt about his eligibility. The w-waver wasn't interested in serving, due to his job, so he voluntarily left & we replaced him with an alternate. Whew!

My guy was not, at the time, under indictment. It was going to be his job to consider his own indictment and, even more problematic, the indictments of about 20 of his fellow "business men". Since I only have one Grand jury empaneled at a time for six month terms, I got to wait six months for another panel.

The only minutes mentioned Chap. 19 or 20 are the minutes of the court (20.22) after the indictments are presented to the judge or district clerk. Only the indictments are entered on the court minutes. It is clear from case law that records prepared by the grand jury are secret. The Stern case was mentioned to support the release as "material to the administration of justice" This view overlooks the entire discussion immediately prior to that statement."CONFIDENTIALITY ALSO PROTECTS THE INNOCENT ACCUSED WHO IS EXONERATED FROM DISCLOSURE OF THE FACT THAT HE HAS BEEN UNDER INVESTIGATION."P622. This only part of a much longer commentary but it makes the point of why the grand jury minutes are secret available only under court order.The protection of witnesses is another.Harrison 34SW3rd660 has a excellent discussion as well.

Way to go, David, on your first post! Another elected DA ventures into the wilderness.

Thanks,John I fell strongly about this because my district clerk released the GJ minutes of a holdover GJ before the term ended to anyone who asked. All the witnesses we put on for 4 months were outed to the bad guys atty.All because she learned in seminar it was public record. I've put witnesses before as many as 4 GJ's on one investigation. If it's public record what's the use? When all the case law and statues speak of secrecy for the GJ where is any authority to release the grand jurors'minutes? I have found none. Apparently no one else has so why do it!!!