57 Misc. 3d 1029
N.Y. City Crim. Ct.2017Background
- Defendant charged with criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree and unlawful possession of a knife; moves under Civil Rights Law § 50-a(2) and CPL § 610.25 for a subpoena duces tecum and in camera review of NYPD/CCRB personnel records for Officer Santiago, the arresting officer.
- Motion filed July 18, 2017; NYPD opposed, CCRB declined to intervene, People did not respond; defendant provided affidavit of service showing motion was served at the 52nd Precinct where Officer Santiago worked.
- Civil Rights Law § 50-a makes police personnel records confidential and requires a court order (after notice to interested parties and a judicial finding of a clear factual predicate) for in camera review and limited disclosure of relevant material.
- Defendant submitted complaints from three civil suits (alleging excessive force and false arrest involving Officer Santiago) arguing those allegations are similar to facts of his arrest (he alleges Officer Santiago tackled him while he fled gunshots, caused injury, and later accused him of possessing a gravity knife).
- Court applied Gissendanner framework: defendant must make a good-faith factual predicate showing a reasonable likelihood the personnel file contains materially relevant impeachment/exculpatory information; the court found service adequate and the threshold met because the civil suits alleged misconduct similar to defendant’s claims and the officer’s testimony is likely central.
- Court granted the subpoena; directed defendant to submit a subpoena for the judge’s signature and ordered that disclosure after in camera review be limited to relevant, material information.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Adequacy of service/notice under §50-a | NYPD/CCRB/Officer are interested parties and must be heard; notice was given | Defendant contends he served motion at precinct where officer worked (affidavit of service) | Service found prima facie adequate; interested parties had opportunity to be heard |
| Threshold showing under §50-a/Gissendanner | NYPD: defendant failed to show real likelihood personnel file contains relevant material | Defendant relied on three civil complaints alleging similar misconduct to show a good-faith factual predicate | Court found defendant met liberal Gissendanner threshold; allowed in camera review |
| Relevance of pending/settled civil suits as impeachment evidence | NYPD: pending/settled suits are not admissions and irrelevant | Defendant: allegations in civil suits may show pattern and bear on credibility | Court held allegations in civil suits can be considered and may support in camera review |
| Nexus requirement between civil suit allegations and criminal arrest | NYPD: must be specific and materially similar | Defendant: suits alleged excessive force/false arrest similar to his factual claims (tackle, injury, alleged planted knife) | Court found a tenable nexus existed and that officer’s records could bear on reliability of charges/testimony |
Key Cases Cited
- People v Gissendanner, 48 N.Y.2d 543 (Court of Appeals 1979) (sets framework requiring a factual predicate showing records likely contain material impeachment/exculpatory information)
- People v Garrett, 23 N.Y.3d 878 (Court of Appeals 2014) (civil suit allegations can be favorable impeachment evidence)
- People v Smith, 27 N.Y.3d 652 (Court of Appeals 2016) (prior bad acts or unproven allegations may be proper for impeachment if relevant to credibility)
- Zarn v. City of New York, 198 A.D.2d 220 (App. Div. 2d Dept. 1993) (purpose of §50-a review is to prevent fishing expeditions into personnel files for general credibility impeachment)
- Cox v. New York City Hous. Auth., 105 A.D.2d 663 (App. Div. 1st Dept. 1984) (statute interpreted liberally because defendant cannot know precisely what information is in personnel records)
- Rivera v. Banks, 135 A.D.3d 621 (App. Div. 1st Dept. 2016) (affidavit of service can be prima facie evidence of proper service on officer at place of business)