U.S. Code » Title 18 » Part PART II— CRIMINAL PROCEDURE › Chapter CHAPTER 215— GRAND JURY

18 U.S.C. § 3322

Disclosure of certain matters occurring before grand jury

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 18 CasesGoogle Scholar
(a) A person who is privy to grand jury information—(1) received in the course of duty as an attorney for the government; or(2) disclosed under rule 6(e)(3)(A)(ii) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure;may disclose that information to an attorney for the government for use in enforcing section 951 of the Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery and Enforcement Act of 1989 or for use in connection with any civil forfeiture provision of Federal law.(b)(1) Upon motion of an attorney for the government, a court may direct disclosure of matters occurring before a grand jury during an investigation of a banking law violation to identified personnel of a Federal or State financial institution regulatory agency—(A) for use in relation to any matter within the jurisdiction of such regulatory agency; or(B) to assist an attorney for the government to whom matters have been disclosed under subsection (a).(2) A court may issue an order under paragraph (1) at any time during or after the completion of the investigation of the grand jury, upon a finding of a substantial need.(c) A person to whom matter has been disclosed under this section shall not use such matter other than for the purpose for which such disclosure was authorized.(d) As used in this section—(1) the term “banking law violation” means a violation of, or a conspiracy to violate—(A) section 215, 656, 657, 1005, 1006, 1007, 1014, 1344, 1956, or 1957;(B) section 1341 or 1343 affecting a financial institution; or(C) any provision of subchapter II of chapter 53 of title 31, United States Code;(2) the term “attorney for the government” has the meaning given such term in the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure; and(3) the term “grand jury information” means matters occurring before a grand jury other than the deliberations of the grand jury or the vote of any grand juror.(Added Pub. L. 101–73, title IX, § 964(a), Aug. 9, 1989, 103 Stat. 505; amended Pub. L. 106–102, title VII, § 740, Nov. 12, 1999, 113 Stat. 1480; Pub. L. 106–185, § 10, Apr. 25, 2000, 114 Stat. 217; Pub. L. 107–273, div. C, title I, § 11002, Nov. 2, 2002, 116 Stat. 1816.)Editorial NotesReferences in Text

Section 951 of the Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery and Enforcement Act of 1989, referred to in subsec. (a), is classified to section 1833a of Title 12, Banks and Banking.

The Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, referred to in subsecs. (a)(2) and (d)(2), are set out in the Appendix to this title.

Prior Provisions

A prior section 3322, act June 25, 1948, ch. 645, 62 Stat. 829, related to the summoning of and number of grand jurors, prior to repeal by Pub. L. 101–73, § 964(a). See Rule 6(a) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, set out in the Appendix to this title.

Amendments

2002—Subsec. (d)(1)(A). Pub. L. 107–273, § 11002(1), substituted “1344, 1956, or 1957;” for “or 1344; or”.

Subsec. (d)(1)(C). Pub. L. 107–273, § 11002(2), (3), added subpar. (C).

2000—Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 106–185 struck out “concerning a banking law violation” after “grand jury information” in introductory provisions and substituted “any civil forfeiture provision of Federal law” for “civil forfeiture under section 981 of title 18, United States Code, of property described in section 981(a)(1)(C) of such title” in concluding provisions.

1999—Subsec. (b)(1). Pub. L. 106–102, § 740(1), inserted “Federal or State” before “financial institution” in introductory provisions.

Subsec. (b)(2). Pub. L. 106–102, § 740(2), inserted “at any time during or after the completion of the investigation of the grand jury,” after “paragraph (1)”.

Statutory Notes and Related SubsidiariesEffective Date of 2000 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 106–185 applicable to any forfeiture proceeding commenced on or after the date that is 120 days after Apr. 25, 2000, see section 21 of Pub. L. 106–185, set out as a note under section 1324 of Title 8, Aliens and Nationality.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 19 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1999–2024 · leading case: Commonwealth v. Santos, 176 A.3d 877 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2017).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Commonwealth v. Santos, 176 A.3d 877 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2017). “See also 18 U.S.C. § 3322 (entitled "Disclosure of certain matters occurring before grand jury”), “A knowing violation of Rule 6 ,.”
Stuart McKeever v. William Barr, 920 F.3d 842 (D.C. Cir. 2019). “- may be made to: (i) an attorney for the government for use in performing that attorney's duty; (ii) any government personnel - including those of a state, state subdivision, Indian tribe, or foreign government - that an attorney for the government considers necessary to assist…”
United States v. Sriram, 147 F. Supp. 2d 914 (N.D. Ill. 2001). · cites it 2× “Section 1345(a)(1)(B) states that an injunction may be premised on a banking law violation, as defined in 18 U.S.C. § 3322 (d), which in turn defines banking law violation as violations of various sections of the criminal — not civil— code.”
In Re Petters Co., Inc., 401 B.R. 391 (Bankr. D. Minn. 2009). “In pertinent part, these subsections authorize legal actions as follows: (2) If a person is alienating or disposing of property, or intends to alienate or dispose of property, obtained as a result of a banking law violation (as defined in [ 18 U.S.C. § 3322 (d)] ...), the…”
United States v. Bowen, 969 F. Supp. 2d 546 (E.D. La. 2013). “ury matter— other than the grand jury’s deliberations or any grand juror’s vote — may be made to: (ii) any government personnel — including those of a state, state subdivision, Indian tribe, or foreign government — that an attorney for the government considers necessary to…”
People v. Moorer, 959 N.Y.S.2d 868 (2013). “The Magistrate rejected the government’s argument that the court had authority to direct the cell service provider to provide real time data based on a collective combination of federal statutes, specifically 18 USC §§ 3322 , 3123 (Pen Register and Trap and Trace Statute), 47…”
United States v. Payment Processing Ctr., LLC, 435 F. Supp. 2d 462 (E.D. Pa. 2006). “Section 1345(a)(2) authorizes property restraints when a person is alienating or disposing of property, or intends to do so, and the property was obtained as a result of, or traceable to, a “banking law violation,” as defined in 18 U.S.C. § 3322 , or a federal health care…”
United States v. Legro, 284 F. App'x 143 (5th Cir. 2008). “” 18 U.S.C. § 3322 (d)(1)(B) (“the term ‘banking law violation’ means a violation of, or a conspiracy to violate .”
Jacobs v. Schiffer, 47 F. Supp. 2d 16 (D.D.C. 1999). · cites it 2× “§ 2071 (concerning the removal of government documents) 18 U.S.C. § 3322 (a)(1) (concerning the disclosure of grand jury information in banking cases); 44 U.”
In re Application to Unseal Dockets Related to the Indep. Couns.'s 1998 Investigation of President Clinton, 308 F. Supp. 3d 314 (D.C. Cir. 2018). · cites it 5× “that an attorney for the government considers necessary to assist in performing that attorney's duty to enforce federal criminal law," or "(iii) a person authorized by 18 U.S.C. § 3322 ." FED. R. CRIM. P. 6(e)(3)(A)(i)-(iii).”
In Re: Application to Unseal Dockets Related to the Indep. Couns.'s 1998 Investigation of President Clinton, No. Misc. No. 2018-0019 (D.D.C. Apr. 16, 2018). · cites it 5× “that an attorney for the government considers necessary to assist in performing that attorney’s duty to enforce federal criminal law,” or “(iii) a person authorized by 18 U.S.C. § 3322 .” FED. R. CRIM. P. 6(e)(3)(A)(i)–(iii).”
In re Grand Jury Proceedings, 17 F. Supp. 3d 1033 (S.D. Cal. 2013). “that an attorney for the government considers necessary to assist in performing that attorney’s duty to enforce federal criminal law” and a person authorized by 18 U.S.C. § 3322 , which permits disclosure of certain matters occurring before the grand jury.”
Show all 19 citing cases →
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.