## Facts

- A pro se litigant, Anthony R. Martin-Trigona, sent a letter and sealed enclosure to the Clerk of the U.S. District Court in New Haven, Connecticut, referencing a grand jury sitting in that district.
- The letter asked the Clerk to convey the sealed enclosure directly to the grand jury and instructed the Clerk not to give the materials to the United States Attorney.
- The court invited comment from the United States Attorney, who advised that the court should not transmit the materials unless the grand jury foreperson requested them.
- The court treated the matter as a miscellaneous proceeding to determine how unsolicited communications addressed to a federal grand jury should be handled.
- The court considered the sender’s history of abusive litigation conduct as context for the request to bypass prosecutorial and judicial review.

## Issues

1. Whether an individual has any right to communicate directly with a federal grand jury, absent a request from the grand jury, and without approval by a prosecutor or a judge.
2. Whether attempts to transmit written materials to a grand jury through the Clerk, outside prosecutorial or judicial supervision, are proper.

## Decision

- The court held that neither a grand jury target nor a private complainant has a right to communicate directly, in writing or otherwise, with a federal grand jury without approval of a prosecutor or a judge.
- The court found no constitutional, statutory, or common-law basis for unsolicited direct submissions to a federal grand jury without prosecutorial or judicial participation.
- The court refused to forward the sealed communication to the grand jury absent a request from the grand jury or appropriate supervision by a prosecutor or the court.
- The court accepted the position that materials should not be submitted to the grand jury unless requested by the grand jury foreperson.

## Legal Principles

- There is no constitutional, statutory, or common-law right for private persons (including targets) to place communications directly before a federal grand jury without prosecutorial or judicial approval.
- Grand jury access and the flow of information to a federal grand jury are subject to screening and control by prosecutors and courts.
- Unsupervised private efforts to inject materials into grand jury proceedings constitute improper private prosecutorial initiatives and may be rejected to protect orderly grand jury functioning.

## Conclusion

The court maintained prosecutorial and judicial control over communications to the grand jury and rejected any claimed right to submit unsolicited written materials directly to the grand jury outside that supervision.


In re New Haven Grand Jury, 604 F. Supp. 453 (D. Conn. 1985)