Senate Bill S1512

                                BILL NUMBER:S1512

TITLE OF BILL:
An act
to amend the vehicle and traffic law, in relation to increasing the
parameters of driving while ability impaired to include driving while
ability affected by drugs

PURPOSE: This bill, introduced at the request of the
Judiciary, would
amend the criminal procedure law to permit the court to issue an
order precluding the disclosure of jurors' names and addresses upon a
showing by the People that such an order is necessary to prevent
bribery, jury tampering or physical injury to or harassment of jurors.

SUMMARY OF PROVISIONS: This measure would repeal
subdivision 1-a of
section 270.15 of the Criminal Procedure Law and add a new section
270.17, to provide the court with the authority to preclude the
disclosure of jurors' and prospective jurors' names. Currently, under
subdivision 1-a of section 270.15 the court may only issue a
protective order regulating disclosure of the business or residential
address of any prospective sworn juror to any person or persons,
other than to counsel for either party. It does not allow the court
to protect jurors' or prospective jurors' names from disclosure, nor
does it provide complete assurance that jurors' addresses will not be
              

disclosed to the defendant by the defense counsel. Thus, Subdivision
1-a fails to provide the court with sufficient means to protect
jurors from intimidation and harm.

Further this measure provides that the prosecutor may move within
three days prior to the commencement of jury selection (excluding
Saturdays, Sundays and Holidays) for an order directing that jurors
shall not disclose their names or residential or business addresses.
The court could permit the prosecutor to file such a motion
thereafter, for good cause shown. At a hearing on the motion, the
prosecutor would be required to show by clear and convincing evidence
that such an order is necessary to protect against the likelihood of
bribery, jury tampering or intimidation. In determining whether the
prosecutor has sustained this burden, the court shall consider any
relevant factors, including:

1. Whether the defendant or persons acting on the defendant's behalf
have bribed, tampered with, or caused or attempted to cause physical
injury to or harassment of a juror or prospective juror, or a witness
or prospective witness, in another criminal action or proceeding or
in the instant proceeding;

2. Whether defendant is a member of a group that has manifested an
intention to harm or intimidate witnesses or jurors;

3. The seriousness of the charges against defendant;

4. The extent of pretrial publicity about the criminal action or
proceeding.

If the court determines that a protective order should be issued, it
shall direct that all jurors and prospective jurors be identified by
some means other than their names and their residential and business
addresses. To balance any adverse effect on the defendant of
withholding the identities of jurors, this measure permits the court
to enlarge the scope and duration of the parties' examination of
prospective jurors to assure that the parties have sufficient
information upon which to base the exercise of peremptory challenges
and challenges for cause.

This measure further seeks to offset any prejudicial effect of
selecting jurors on an anonymous basis by requiring the court to give
precautionary instruction to the jury upon the defendant's request
(ie. the fact that the jury was selected on an anonymous basis is not
a factor from which any inference unfavorable to the defendant may be
drawn).

JUSTIFICATION: In order to preserve our criminal
justice system as
impartial and fair, it is critical that a jury be able to render an
objective decision. To that end, we have an obligation to protect
jurors from recrimination for their decisions. Certainly jurors
should not be expected to bear the burden of risking what may happen
to them or their families should they render a guilty verdict.
Explicit threats to jurors or even just the fear of retaliation could
very well affect a jurors' ability to fairly and impartially issue a
verdict.

When a serious threat to juror safety reasonably is found to exist,
the law must allow for precautionary measures to be taken. This
legislation would expressly do just that, by expanding current law to
permit the court to not only preclude the residential and business
addresses of jurors from disclosure, but their names as well.

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY:
2010-2011: S.947-Passed Senate
2009-2010: S.569--Senate Codes Committee
2007-2008: S.615-Passed Senate
2005-2006: S.661--Passed Senate
2003-2004: S.775--Passed Senate
2001-2002: S.103--Passed Senate
1999-00: S.822--Passed Senate
1997-98: S.1134--Passed Senate
1995-96: S.5211-Passed Senate

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: None.

EFFECTIVE DATE: This act shall take effect on the
thirtieth day after
it shall have become law.