Opinion 16-101

June 16, 2016

Digest:         The effective date of Opinion 15-197(B) is September 1, 2016.

Rules:          Opinion 15-197(B); 10-111; 09-173.

Opinion:

         In Opinion 15-197(B), the Committee amended Opinion 09-173 by striking the final paragraph and the last twelve words of the digest, to reflect that a justice court should not routinely notify witnesses for the prosecution, even if the court is willing to do the same for defendants and defense attorneys on request.¹ The Committee noted (15-197[B] [citation omitted]):

If the District Attorney’s office needs more funds to track cases and notify witnesses in local justice courts, that problem must be addressed through the regular legislative or political process. Absent a legal requirement to do so, the town and village courts must not compensate for any apparent deficiencies in the budgeting process by routinely taking on the non-judicial functions of notifying the District Attorney's witnesses.

         In the present inquiry, a town or village justice asks about the effective date of Opinion 15-197(B).

         On consideration of all relevant facts and circumstances, the Committee believes Opinion 15-197(B) should go into effect on September 1, 2016. Accordingly, starting on September 1, 2016, a town or village justice court must not assist the District Attorney’s office by notifying the District Attorney’s witnesses, complainants and officers of their upcoming court appearances at hearings and trials.

________________________

         ¹ Of course, where the complainant police officer or trooper serves as the prosecution’s sole representative, the court may “provide the trial schedule notice to that trooper/officer in his/her prosecutorial capacity” (Opinion 10-111).