titantoo
07-07-2005, 08:18 PM
July 7, 2005
Court Rules Against Using Sealed Records in Sentencing
By MICHAEL COOPER (http://query.nytimes.com/search/query?ppds=bylL&v1=MICHAEL%20COOPER&fdq=19960101&td=sysdate&sort=newest&ac=MICHAEL%20COOPER&inline=nyt-per)
ALBANY, July 6 - The state's highest court ruled on Wednesday that judges cannot consider the sealed records of defendants when sentencing them for new crimes.
The unanimous ruling overturned a lower court's decision to grant a request by the Manhattan district attorney's office to unseal the records of four people who were convicted of blocking traffic at Fifth Avenue and 47th Street in 2003 to protest the war in Iraq and the Israeli occupation of the Palestinian territories.
Prosecutors argued that the sealed records, almost all of which involved charges related to acts of civil disobedience that had been dismissed, showed that the defendants had repeatedly caused major disruptions with civil disobedience. Defense lawyers argued that the sealed records were essentially nothing more than old, unproven accusations, and said it would be unfair to use them to argue for tougher sentences.
The Court of Appeals ruled 7 to 0 on Wednesday that the law allows judges to unseal such records only in certain narrowly defined cases. The court held that while the records may be unsealed to help law enforcement agencies with investigations, they may not be used in sentencing hearings, and it ordered the records of the protesters resealed.
Stephen W. Edwards, a lawyer for the protesters, said he was pleased by the sweeping nature of the decision. "It is hard to imagine anything more fundamental than when a case brought against you is done, you are allowed to think of it as done and not fear that the government will delve into their dusty old files and raise old allegations that were never proven, and bring them against you in a new proceeding," he said.
Sherry Hunter, a spokeswoman for the District Attorney, Robert M. Morgenthau, said that since the court was the final arbiter of the state laws, the records would be resealed. "As the court sees it, the section prevents a trial court from unsealing records from a defendant's prior cases even if they might be useful in determining what sentence a defendant should receive after a conviction in a new case," she said.
The ruling comes as Mr. Morgenthau is facing a Democratic primary challenge. A spokesman for his challenger, Leslie Crocker Snyder, declined to comment on the ruling.
Almost all of the sealed records in the case involved what lawyers call A.C.D.'s, or adjournments in contemplation of dismissal. The way they work is, if a defendant agrees to stay out of trouble, usually for six months or a year, and sometimes to perform community service or meet other conditions, the charges against him or her are dropped and the record is supposed to be sealed. The A.C.D.'s are commonly handed out for small infractions, or to first-time offenders, or after large-scale arrests stemming from protests.
The four protesters - Katherine Barnhart, Lisa Puccio, Herbert Quester and Eustacia Smith - are now set to be sentenced on Aug. 1.
Court Rules Against Using Sealed Records in Sentencing
By MICHAEL COOPER (http://query.nytimes.com/search/query?ppds=bylL&v1=MICHAEL%20COOPER&fdq=19960101&td=sysdate&sort=newest&ac=MICHAEL%20COOPER&inline=nyt-per)
ALBANY, July 6 - The state's highest court ruled on Wednesday that judges cannot consider the sealed records of defendants when sentencing them for new crimes.
The unanimous ruling overturned a lower court's decision to grant a request by the Manhattan district attorney's office to unseal the records of four people who were convicted of blocking traffic at Fifth Avenue and 47th Street in 2003 to protest the war in Iraq and the Israeli occupation of the Palestinian territories.
Prosecutors argued that the sealed records, almost all of which involved charges related to acts of civil disobedience that had been dismissed, showed that the defendants had repeatedly caused major disruptions with civil disobedience. Defense lawyers argued that the sealed records were essentially nothing more than old, unproven accusations, and said it would be unfair to use them to argue for tougher sentences.
The Court of Appeals ruled 7 to 0 on Wednesday that the law allows judges to unseal such records only in certain narrowly defined cases. The court held that while the records may be unsealed to help law enforcement agencies with investigations, they may not be used in sentencing hearings, and it ordered the records of the protesters resealed.
Stephen W. Edwards, a lawyer for the protesters, said he was pleased by the sweeping nature of the decision. "It is hard to imagine anything more fundamental than when a case brought against you is done, you are allowed to think of it as done and not fear that the government will delve into their dusty old files and raise old allegations that were never proven, and bring them against you in a new proceeding," he said.
Sherry Hunter, a spokeswoman for the District Attorney, Robert M. Morgenthau, said that since the court was the final arbiter of the state laws, the records would be resealed. "As the court sees it, the section prevents a trial court from unsealing records from a defendant's prior cases even if they might be useful in determining what sentence a defendant should receive after a conviction in a new case," she said.
The ruling comes as Mr. Morgenthau is facing a Democratic primary challenge. A spokesman for his challenger, Leslie Crocker Snyder, declined to comment on the ruling.
Almost all of the sealed records in the case involved what lawyers call A.C.D.'s, or adjournments in contemplation of dismissal. The way they work is, if a defendant agrees to stay out of trouble, usually for six months or a year, and sometimes to perform community service or meet other conditions, the charges against him or her are dropped and the record is supposed to be sealed. The A.C.D.'s are commonly handed out for small infractions, or to first-time offenders, or after large-scale arrests stemming from protests.
The four protesters - Katherine Barnhart, Lisa Puccio, Herbert Quester and Eustacia Smith - are now set to be sentenced on Aug. 1.