skip navigation


Register for Latest Research

Stay Informed
Register with NCJRS to receive NCJRS's biweekly e-newsletter JUSTINFO and additional periodic emails from NCJRS and the NCJRS federal sponsors that highlight the latest research published or sponsored by the Office of Justice Programs.

NCJRS Abstract

The document referenced below is part of the NCJRS Virtual Library collection. To conduct further searches of the collection, visit the Virtual Library. See the Obtain Documents page for direction on how to access resources online, via mail, through interlibrary loans, or in a local library.


NCJ Number: 78462 Find in a Library
Title: Louisiana Grand Jury - Its Precarious Relationship With the District Attorney
Journal: Southern University Law Review  Volume:6  Dated:(Fall 1979)  Pages:151-173
Author(s): J Shropshire
Date Published: 1979
Page Count: 23
Format: Article
Language: English
Country: United States of America
Annotation: The traditional purposes of the Louisiana grand jury, current abuses of these purposes by the district attorney, and suggestions for grand jury reform are discussed.
Abstract: Traditionally, the Louisiana grand jury has been considered an arm of the court with the functions of (1) investigating crimes committed within its jurisdiction, (2) identifying persons suspected of having committed offenses and determining whether there is probable cause to charge the person with the offense, and (3) publishing its findings to the court. Grand jury proceedings are not meant to be adversary but rather to provide the accused with the right to an independent determination of probable cause. Since the district attorney has become the fulcrum of Louisiana criminal prosecutions, the grand jury has been relegated to a weak position in the criminal justice system. The grand jury has become only an accuser and the captive of the district attorney, functioning merely as a prosecutorial rubber stamp. While the grand jury should be retained, steps should be taken to strengthen its independence. These steps might include relegating the prosecutor to an advisory role, requiring that the grand jury receive only constitutionally admissible evidence and that the evidence alone constitute probable cause to believe that the accused has committed a crime, and allowing counsel inside the grand jury room. Other reforms could include (1) giving the target of the grand jury investigation the opportunity to testify; (2) making a grand jury subpoena returnable only when the grand jury is sitting and identifying the general subject area of the investigation; and (3) recording all grand jury proceedings (except the jurors' deliberations), making them accessible for pretrial discovery. Ninety-five footnotes are listed.
Index Term(s): Court reform; Grand juries; Louisiana; Prosecutorial discretion
To cite this abstract, use the following link:

*A link to the full-text document is provided whenever possible. For documents not available online, a link to the publisher's website is provided. Tell us how you use the NCJRS Library and Abstracts Database - send us your feedback.