Can a District Attorney bring a writ of prohibition against the District Attorney for failing to produce evidence before a grand jury?

The District Attorney challenges the jurisdictional predicate for that order in this prohibition proceeding. The majority have determined that the writ should be denied. They hold (p. 1059, at p. 629 of 462 N.Y.S.2d, at p. 409 of 449 N.E.2d) that "[t]he order in which witnesses are presented by the Grand Jury is * * * within the supervisory jurisdiction of the court". This court has previously stated, however, that it is not. Thus, it said in People v. Sexton, 187 N.Y. 495, 513-514, 80 N.E. 396: "A grand jury, although for some purpose a part of the court in connection with which it is convened, is in some aspects a separate and independent tribunal, free from the restraint of the court, and at liber to decide upon its own methods of procedure in so far as they are not controlled by statute or immemorial usage having the force of law. One of the attributes and powers of this independent existence is to decide when and in what order witnesses shall be called, and, to some extent, who shall be called. For all the ordinary purposes of procuring evidence a grand jury is a distinct body clothed with authority to conduct the examination of witnesses in any way that does not conflict with established legal rules. The court has no general control over witnesses summoned before a grand jury except to punish them for contumacy or contempt " (emphasis added).