Free Consultations & We're Available 24/7
WE'RE A BOUTIQUE LAW FIRM.
TRUST 50 YEARS OF EXPERIENCE.
WE SERVICE CLIENTS NATIONWIDE.
So your probably thinking all grand juries work the same way regardless of whether there state or federal, or maybe your convinced the protections are identical across both systems, or worse – you believe state grand juries might be more fair than federal ones. Maybe you think your state offers better defendant rights. Maybe your hoping to avoid federal prosecution by staying in state court. Or maybe you believe the differences are just minor technicalities. Look, let me tell you something – your desperately trying to figure out which system will screw you less. But heres the HARSH truth – both state and federal grand juries are rigged against defendants, with federal grand juries being MORE secretive and state grand juries offering slightly more rights that still mean nothing according to extensive research showing both systems achieve near-automatic indictments!
The first massive difference is that federal prosecutors MUST use grand juries for all felonies – its required by the Fifth Amendment. They have no choice. Every single federal felony case goes through the grand jury meat grinder. Meanwhile, only about HALF the states even require grand juries for felonies. The other half let prosecutors file charges directly through preliminary hearings or criminal informations.
Think about what this means. In federal court, your guaranteed to face secret grand jury proceedings with no defense participation. In many states, you might get a preliminary hearing where your lawyer can cross-examine witnesses, challenge evidence, and make arguments to a judge. The difference is night and day – one is a star chamber, the other is at least partially transparent.
But don’t get too excited about state options. Even in states that allow preliminary hearings, prosecutors often CHOOSE grand juries specifically because there easier to control. Why face a judge and defense attorney when you can present one-sided evidence to dependent grand jurors in secret? Prosecutors pick the process that guarantees victory.
The states that do require grand juries – like New York, California, and others – often have them for all felonies or certain serious felonies. But even these “requirements” have exceptions and workarounds. Prosecutors are masters at venue shopping and charge manipulation to get the forum they want.
Here’s a CRITICAL difference that might actually matter – in many state systems, defendants have the RIGHT to testify before grand juries if they choose. In New York, for example, you can demand to testify as long as you waive immunity. In federal court? You have NO right to testify unless prosecutors invite you, which they rarely do unless its a trap.
This state right sounds good but its usually a disaster. You testify WITHOUT your lawyer present, facing skilled prosecutors who twist every word. You must waive your Fifth Amendment rights completely. Any tiny inconsistency becomes perjury charges. Prosecutors use your testimony to lock in statements they’ll destroy at trial.
Even in states where you have this “right,” most defense lawyers beg clients not to use it. Its like having the right to jump into a shark tank – technically allowed but practically suicidal. Prosecutors are hoping you’ll testify so they can trap you into admissions, lock in your story, and find contradictions to exploit.
The federal system’s prohibition on defendant testimony is actually more honest – they’re admitting you have no real participation rights rather than pretending you do while setting traps.
Another key difference involves defense participation. In state systems, defense lawyers can sometimes submit evidence or information to prosecutors who MIGHT present it to grand juries. You can provide exculpatory documents, witness statements, expert reports – and prosecutors might (but probably won’t) share them with grand jurors.
In federal court, forget it. Defense counsel has ZERO ability to present anything. You can beg prosecutors to include exculpatory evidence, but they have no obligation to do so. Federal prosecutors routinely ignore defense submissions entirely. The federal grand jury never knows favorable evidence exists.
This state “advantage” is mostly illusion. State prosecutors accepting defense evidence doesn’t mean they’ll present it fairly. They might mention it briefly while spending hours on incriminating evidence. They might mischaracterize it. They might present it in the worst possible light. Your giving them ammunition to explain away.
I’ve seen state prosecutors accept defense evidence, then use it to strengthen there case. That alibi witness statement? They’ll find inconsistencies. That exculpatory document? They’ll claim it proves guilty knowledge. That expert report? They’ll argue it shows consciousness of guilt. Your evidence becomes there evidence.
Both federal and many state grand juries have 16-23 members, but voting requirements vary significantly. Federal grand juries need only 12 votes to indict – barely half. Some states require higher thresholds, like two-thirds or three-quarters. But when prosecutors control all information, even higher thresholds are easily met.
New York requires 12 out of 23, same as federal. California requires 14 out of 19 for regular grand juries. Texas requires 9 out of 12. The numbers vary, but the result is the same – prosecutors get indictments whenever they want them. Whether its 12, 14, or 9 votes, prosecutors controlling the narrative guarantees success.
The voting differences are meaningless when all systems achieve 95%+ indictment rates. A slightly higher voting threshold doesn’t protect you when prosecutors present unopposed, one-sided cases to dependent grand jurors. Its like asking if you’d rather be hit by a truck going 60 mph or 65 mph – the outcome is the same.
Some states have different types of grand juries – regular, special, investigative. Each has different rules, terms, and powers. But they all share the same fundamental flaw: prosecutors control everything while defendants are excluded. The varieties of grand juries are just different flavors of the same poison.
In both state and federal systems, grand jurors can ask questions of witnesses – and this power is often MORE dangerous in state courts where grand jurors are sometimes encouraged to be more active. They can request additional evidence, ask for specific witnesses, and even direct investigations in some states.
The problem is grand jurors don’t know what questions to ask. There completely dependent on prosecutors for legal understanding. When they ask questions, there often helping prosecutors by raising issues the prosecutor “forgot” to cover. Grand juror questions frequently make things worse for defendants, not better.
In federal court, grand jurors can ask questions but usually don’t. There trained to be passive recipients of prosecutorial presentations. State grand jurors, especially in jurisdictions that emphasize there “investigative” role, might be more active. But active ignorance is worse than passive ignorance when prosecutors are manipulating the process.
The questions grand jurors ask reveal there bias and misunderstanding. “Why didn’t the defendant talk to police?” (Because he has rights.) “Why did he hire a lawyer?” (Because he’s not stupid.) “Why won’t he explain himself?” (Because he’s not required to.) These questions show how prosecutors have already poisoned there thinking.
Federal grand juries serve longer terms – 18 months, extendable to 24, sometimes 36 in complex cases. State grand juries typically serve shorter terms – often 1-4 months, though some serve up to a year. The longer federal terms mean more time for prosecutors to build complex cases and pressure targets.
Longer federal terms create more sophisticated grand juries – they’ve heard dozens of cases, think they understand law, and become prosecutor-friendly through repeated exposure. By month 18, federal grand jurors are basically junior prosecutors, fully indoctrinated into the government’s worldview.
State grand juries with shorter terms might be less jaded, but also less likely to question prosecutors. New grand jurors are intimidated, confused, and completely dependent on prosecutorial guidance. They don’t know enough to be skeptical. Fresh ignorance is just as dangerous as experienced bias.
The term length also affects investigation pacing. Federal prosecutors can take there time, methodically building cases over many months. State prosecutors might feel pressure to move faster before the grand jury term expires. But rushed injustice or slow injustice – your still getting screwed either way.
Both state and federal grand jury proceedings are SECRET, but federal secrecy is generally more absolute. Federal Rule 6(e) creates permanent, criminal-law-enforced secrecy with very limited exceptions. State secrecy rules vary, with some allowing more disclosure in certain circumstances.
Federal grand jury secrecy is forever. Period. Criminal penalties for violation. No exceptions for defendants. No review by courts. Nothing. State secrecy might have more exceptions – some states allow limited disclosure for impeachment, some permit judges to review transcripts in camera, some have sunset provisions.
But don’t think state “exceptions” help much. Getting a state judge to order disclosure is still nearly impossible. The exceptions are so narrow and requirements so strict that they rarely apply. State secrecy might be 99% absolute instead of 100%, but your still operating in darkness.
The practical difference is minimal. Whether in state or federal court, your locked out of proceedings, can’t review transcripts, don’t know what was said, can’t challenge lies, can’t correct mistakes. The grand jury remains a black box where prosecutors operate without scrutiny.
Some states have unique grand jury features that don’t exist federally. Six states allow citizens to petition for grand juries independent of prosecutors. Some states have “civil grand juries” investigating government corruption. California has criminal grand juries AND civil grand juries. These variations create different risks and opportunities.
Oklahoma, Nebraska, New Mexico, North Dakota, Nevada, and Kansas let citizens circulate petitions to impanel grand juries. This sounds like accountability, but citizen-initiated grand juries often become witch hunts driven by political agendas rather than evidence. Your trading prosecutorial control for mob rule.
Some states have “runaway grand juries” that can investigate beyond what prosecutors present. This sounds good until you realize untrained citizens conducting independent investigations usually make things worse, not better. They don’t know law, don’t understand evidence, and often pursue conspiracy theories.
Special state grand juries for public corruption, organized crime, or complex financial crimes often have extended powers, longer terms, and broader jurisdiction. These super-grand juries are even more dangerous because they combine enhanced power with the same lack of defense participation.
Federal grand juries are more formal, more secretive, and more consistent in there unfairness. State grand juries vary widely but achieve the same unjust results through different mechanisms. Federal prosecutors must use grand juries; state prosecutors choose them when advantageous. Neither system provides meaningful protection against wrongful prosecution.
The supposed state “advantages” – defendant testimony rights, defense evidence submission, shorter terms – are mostly traps and illusions. The federal system’s honest exclusion of defendants might be better than state systems pretending to offer participation while setting traps.
Both systems achieve 95%+ indictment rates. Both operate in secrecy. Both exclude defense lawyers. Both depend on prosecutorial control. Both use the same pathetic probable cause standard. The differences are cosmetic variations on systematic injustice.
Choosing between state and federal grand juries is like choosing between drowning in the ocean or a lake. The water’s different, the location’s different, but the outcome’s the same. Your facing a rigged system designed for prosecutorial victory regardless of which courthouse your in.
Call us RIGHT NOW at 212-300-5196
Whether state or federal, grand juries are rigged against you!
Available 24/7 to fight both state and federal prosecutions!
The bottom line is while differences exist between state and federal grand juries – federal requires them for all felonies while only half of states do, some states allow defendant testimony while federal doesn’t, state terms are shorter, voting requirements vary – BOTH systems are fundamentally rigged against defendants! Federal grand juries are more secretive and formal, state grand juries offer illusory rights that become traps. Both achieve 95%+ indictment rates through prosecutorial control, secrecy, and exclusion of defense participation. Neither system provides real protection against wrongful prosecution. Call us IMMEDIATELY – whether your facing state or federal grand jury proceedings, you need attorneys who understand both systems’ corruptions and can navigate there unique dangers!
This is attorney advertising. Prior results dont guarantee similar outcomes. Both state and federal grand jury systems favor prosecution.
Very diligent, organized associates; got my case dismissed. Hard working attorneys who can put up with your anxiousness. I was accused of robbing a gemstone dealer. Definitely A law group that lays out all possible options and best alternative routes. Recommended for sure.
- ROBIN, GUN CHARGES ROBIN
NJ CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEYS