Supreme Court—State of New York

CRIMINAL TERM—PART K-9 QUEENS COUNTY

•

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

-against-

JOSEPH DI PRISCO, Defendant

Ind. No. 1120/1961

•

Not-Naomi, Esq., argued to unseal the Queens County criminal records. In the essential parts of her argument, she contended on behalf of the Movant, me:

Over half a century ago, on or about September 28, 1961, Movant’s father, Joseph L. Di Prisco, was arrested in Queens County on charges of forgery in the second degree and grand larceny. (A copy of Joseph L. Di Prisco’s Criminal Record is annexed as Exhibit A.)

1. Unsealed contemporaneous records, available on Google, reveal that the case against Joseph L. Di Prisco was resolved in his favor. Presumably, the records pertaining to the case were then sealed in accordance with Criminal Procedure Law (“CPL”) §160.50(1), which provides that “[u]pon the termination of a criminal action or proceeding against a person in favor of such person, … the record of such action or proceeding shall be sealed…”. Notably, there are no other bases for sealing that could potentially apply here. Movant seeks all records and papers relating to his late father’s arrest and prosecution in the criminal action identified herein.
2. Movant is entitled to the Sealed Records pursuant to CPL §160.50(1)(d), which provides that the records sealed under CPL §160.50(1) “shall be made available to the person accused or to such person’s designated agent…”
3. Joseph L. DiPrisco is dead. If he were alive, he would be entitled, as the accused, to unseal the records.
4. Movant should be authorized to unseal those records as his father’s “designated agent” under CPL §160.50(1), as explained in his accompanying affidavit, sworn to on October 16, 2015 (“Di Prisco Aff.”):

1. Movant was designated as his father’s agent with broad powers when his father was alive, and was given a Durable Power of Attorney.

1. There is no countervailing justification to prevent access in this case. The Court of Appeals has explained that the legislative objective was remedial: to prevent a person charged but not convicted from suffering the by-products of an unsuccessful prosecution, such as unemployment or disqualification from a profession, licensing or job.
2. Here, the remedial legislative purpose underlying CPL §160.50 is not implicated because Movant’s father is deceased. His arrest took place over half a century ago.
3. Accordingly, pursuant to CPL §160.50, we respectfully request that the Sealed Records be released to Movant, as the son, heir and designated representative of the late Joseph L. Di Prisco, through his undersigned counsel and legal representative.

   •

   The day before Thanksgiving, the judge rules in our favor.

   The motion to unseal records is granted with appropriate redactions reflected on the copy provided to defendant’s son.

   This constitutes the decision and order of the court.

   Date: November 25, 2015

   •

   The unsealed file contains various pieces of clarifying information as to chronology, the scope and scale of the crimes, and the role my father played in their commission. There is also a record of legal maneuvering: failure to appear; bench warrants issued and bail determined; arraignments; revocation of bench warrants, etc.

   On December 11, 1962, he appeared before The Honorable J. Irwin Shapiro, roughly nineteen months after his initial flight from Brooklyn. I was twelve and I have no recollection of this trip to New York. I find it perplexing, if not unfathomable, that I can recall nothing pertaining to his extended periods of absence, nor anything about my parents’ explanation, presuming they must have offered something, but it is indeed the case. If I had to take a wild guess, they probably intimated he had to leave town to work at another job. That sort of thing would have sounded credible enough for me not to register.

   We know now that he had been indicted and arraigned in July 1961 and was arrested when (or possibly before) he appeared in New York, in September 1961, and that he had testified in assorted cases during that fall. Before Judge Shapiro, the People are represented in 1962 by Assistant DA Bernard M. Patten, who weighs in:

   If Your Honor pleases, this defendant was indicted on an indictment charging forgery in the second degree–six counts, grand larceny second degree–four counts, attempted grand larceny second degree, and conspiracy, along with a codefendant, [NAME REDACTED]. The evidence against this defendant came about by way of the testimony of a coconspirator who was not indicted by the Grand Jury and was given immunity. Further, there were wiretaps introduced into evidence before the Grand Jury. [NAME REDACTED] made a motion to inspect the Grand Jury minutes, and as a result of that motion, on October the 3rd, 1961, Judge Bosch dismissed the indictment against [NAME REDACTED].

   Now I have been in touch with this situation for the last few years and in my opinion [NAME REDACTED] is the main conspirator in this case. Di Prisco in my opinion was a tool of [NAME REDACTED]. I’m confident that if Di Prisco himself had made a motion to inspect the Grand Jury minutes, the same reasoning that Judge Bosch gave in deciding the indictment against [NAME REDACTED] probably would apply; but aside from that, there are some times I suppose when the District Attorney has to consider the equities involved, and in my opinion Di Prisco is not as culpable as [NAME REDACTED] and yet [NAME REDACTED]’s not before this court, and yet after the indictment of this man, I’ve gone into his background and I’m satisfied that he has been rehabilitated. …but I tell you this, your Honor, that I believe that this man is not at this time in a position to be a recidivist. His wife and family live in California. He has the prospect of a good job.

   Then in view of the “equities involved,” he requested that Di Prisco’s indictment be dismissed. “There are other considerations,” he further explained, which he is not willing to “spread on the record.” Doubtless, he was referring to my father’s cooperation with law enforcement in the prosecution of other crimes. The Court acknowledged it had been apprised of the details off the record, and in short ordered the indictment to be dismissed.

   “Defendant is discharged,” ruled Judge Shapiro.

   •

   Scale and scope of the crimes? Not the JFK Lufthansa heist.

   He was charged with six counts of forgery on checks to some individuals and two grocery stores between 9 and 13 February 1961, all in the same mysterious amount, $105.75, which would amount to a not-trivial haul at the time. Those crimes were deemed Forgery in the Second Degree, and four counts of Grand Larceny in the Second Degree, along with ancillary charges including conspiracy as a misdemeanor. He was indicted along with another man, [NAME REDACTED], who was given immunity, probably in order to secure cooperation in another criminal investigation. The man's identity was tantalizingly surmisable upon a review of the entire file and the transcripts; the coconspirator was no one other than the eminent Cheesebox Callahan, for whom my father was an uwitting pawn, according to the ADA. One key piece of evidence: the unsealed indictment details that my dad met [NAME REDACTED] at what was Callahan’s Queens workshop-office address. For years, then, it seems my father travelled along in the same universe with the likes of Callahan and mobsters such as Santa and Aloi. Maybe my dad owed Callahan money, and maybe that explains the checks. He wasn’t the first and he wasn’t the last gambler or loan shark to whom he might have been indebted.

   Even so, the file contains confirmation of the district attorney’s willingness to go to bat for my father. In a memorandum dated January 25, 1962, re: PEOPLE AGAINST DEPRISCO [sic], ADA Patten, Chief of Homicide & Investigations Bureau, gives the court assurances that Di Prisco will appear as promised, as soon as he returns from California. To that end, he requests an adjournment to accommodate his travel schedule. Kind of the gentleman.

   Now, all that was left for him to deal with was the charges in Brooklyn. And his family in California.

   One last thing: as for uncovering his criminal files in Brooklyn, we struck out. They had been destroyed in a warehouse fire.