The New York City Police Department moves to quash a subpoena duces tecum for all Police Department personnel records regarding the disciplinary history reports of P.O. Gregory Santana and P.O. James Burpoe. [Exh. A to Affirmation of Nicholas Reale in Support of Motion to Quash, dated June 9, 2014]. The motion is granted.

In order to prevail on a subpoena to a nonparty, a defendant must "put forth a factual predicate to support the contention that the documents sought in the subpoena will bear relevant and exculpatory evidence [citations omitted]." Indeed, without this predicate "the subpoena merely constitutes a discovery demand directed to a nonparty, which is in contravention to the discovery provisions of CPL article 240." People v Bagley. 279 AD2d 426 (1st Dept. 2001). Moreover, the files at issue here are specifically rendered confidential by New York State Civil Rights Law 50-a.

The defendant has not shown a factual predicate warranting review of these confidential police personnel records. The underlying case arises from a vehicle stop by the officers which they made after they observed the car cross a double yellow line. As defense acknowledges, crack/cocaine was in the car, defendant was arrested and taken to the 26th Precinct. A bag of crack was recovered from co-defendant's waistband and he was then "strip"searched. [Affirmation of Vanessa Macias, dated July 24, 2014 at para. 15]; Affirmation of Nicholas Reale, dated August 6, 2014]. Defense offers no reason why the stop of the vehicle was unreasonable. The ensuing events are not in substantial dispute.

The fact that federal lawsuits were filed against the officers here is not a factual predicate warranting review of their personnel files. According to defendant, two of the suits, which name Officer Santana as a defendant, were settled by the City of New York. This is not an admission of guilt. Lawsuits are settled for many different reasons and such a settlement cannot be used to [*2]warrant searches through a party's confidential files. The other two civil lawsuits, in which Officer Burpoe is a defendant, are still pending and thus cannot be seen as an admission or other proof of guilt. The mere existence of a lawsuit is not a factual predicate for a determination that it is reasonably likely that confidential records contain relevant and exculpatory evidence.

The motion to quash is granted.

BONNIE G. W1TTNER, J.S.C.