• FreeAdvice has a new Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, effective May 25, 2018.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our Terms of Service and use of cookies.

Indictment Dismissal and recharging

Accident - Bankruptcy - Criminal Law / DUI - Business - Consumer - Employment - Family - Immigration - Real Estate - Tax - Traffic - Wills   Please click a topic or scroll down for more.

rwa5659

Junior Member
I have a question concerning Indictments. A friend who had been charged with an offense 10 years ago and the Indictment was dismissed. At the time the Indictment was filed he had faced 3 Counts on the indictment. The Indictment was dismissed before the scheduled trial began. The State claims they brought back the same exact charges and added another count to the Indictment making it 4 Counts instead of the original 3 counts. The reason claimed for the additional charge was that the State Legislature Laws had changed during the 10 years and allowed then to add the additional charge which imposes more imprisonment time.

The original Indictment had been dismissed in the past by the State for there was no evidence of any kind except for the testimony of the alleged victim who had recanted stating the offenses had not been committed. The State documented a number of 12 reasons for the dismissal with claims that the witness/victim had destroyed their credibility due to numerous recantations stating the offenses did occur, then stating they did not occur, giving different reasons for the recantations. During the Hearing over 10 years ago, for the Dismissal of the Indictment after having claimed that the offenses did not occur, the victim under oath, claimed once again that the offenses did occur but the State dismissed the Indictment anyway.

Now, over ten years later the State re-files the charges against the friend and without the alleged victim even filing another complaint. The state obtained a new indictment on behalf of the alleged victim. There was no new evidence of any kind but the statements of the alleged victim/witness. The State claims they brought back the very same charges adding another count to the Indictment. Now allowing the alleged victim to recant again and state the alleged offenses had occurred with no new evidence but that which they had 10 years ago with same statements being made by the alleged victim.

The State Prosecuting Attorney had documented in the dismissal that the Indictment be dismissed with prejudice but the judge had granted the dismissal without prejudice allowing the charges to be re-filed later which seems to be the case.

The State claimed in documentation that these are the same exact charges from ten years back indicating they now believe the alleged victim. Since the State had dismissed the past charges with the alleged victim stating the offenses had been committed, indicating they didn't believe the alleged victim then by dismissing it, how is it possible for them to add this additional count into the indictment for if they had believe the alleged victim 10 years ago and taken him to trail then he would have been facing less imprisonment time then he now faces.

My question is, can these same exact charges be re-filed by the State with such numerous recantations from the alleged victim/witness and can they attach this new count imposing an additional imprisonment time?
 


I'mTheFather

Senior Member
It's interesting that you referred to "the State" several times throughout your post, yet deleted the question that requested the name of that state. :rolleyes:
 

HighwayMan

Super Secret Senior Member
My question is, can these same exact charges be re-filed by the State with such numerous recantations from the alleged victim/witness and can they attach this new count imposing an additional imprisonment time?
Of course they can. They did it, didn't they?

There is a big difference between being indicted and being convicted.
 

FlyingRon

Senior Member
Of course they can. They did it, didn't they?

There is a big difference between being indicted and being convicted.
And more importantly, there's a big difference between being indicted and TRIED. Until the first witness against you is called, you've not yet been tried and the double jeopardy rule doesn't apply.
 

Find the Right Lawyer for Your Legal Issue!

Fast, Free, and Confidential
data-ad-format="auto">
Top