An indictment in South Dakota is a formal accusation by a grand jury that starts a criminal case. When an indictment is dismissed, the court has found a legal reason the case cannot proceed, dropping the charges before trial. This article explains the common grounds for dismissing an indictment, the process for requesting it, and what happens afterward.
Grand Jury Procedural Errors
State law governs the grand jury process, and significant deviations from these rules can invalidate an indictment. One basis for dismissal is the grand jury’s composition. If a juror was not legally qualified to serve, a defendant can challenge the indictment, but a dismissal will not occur if at least five qualified jurors still voted to indict.
Only authorized individuals may be present during grand jury sessions.1South Dakota Legislature. Codified Law 23A-5-11 The presence of an unauthorized person during testimony or deliberation can lead to dismissal.2South Dakota Legislature. Codified Law 23A-8-2 South Dakota law also mandates the recording of these proceedings. A failure to properly record testimony can justify setting the indictment aside, as it may prevent a defendant from identifying other grounds for dismissal.
Insufficient Evidence Presented
For a grand jury to indict, the prosecutor must present evidence establishing probable cause that a crime was committed and the accused did it.3South Dakota Legislature. Codified Law 23A-5-18 If the evidence is legally insufficient, the indictment may be dismissed. This can happen if there is a complete lack of credible evidence on an essential element of the crime.
For example, if a theft charge requires proof of intent and no evidence of that intent was presented, the indictment is flawed. An indictment based entirely on incompetent or inadmissible evidence may also be subject to dismissal.
Violations of Defendant Rights
Constitutional violations can invalidate an indictment. An unnecessary delay in bringing a case before the grand jury or to trial can be grounds for dismissal, as it protects a defendant from having charges linger indefinitely.4South Dakota Legislature. Codified Law 23A-44-5.1 The court considers the length of the delay, the reason for it, and whether it harmed the defendant’s ability to prepare a defense.
Due process violations that undermine the fairness of the proceedings can also lead to dismissal. This could involve government conduct connected to securing the indictment that “shocks the conscience.” A court may dismiss such an indictment to protect the justice system’s integrity, but the violation must have prejudiced the defendant.
Improper Actions by the Prosecution
Prosecutors must act fairly during grand jury proceedings. If a prosecutor’s misconduct substantially influences the grand jury’s decision, a dismissal may be warranted. This includes knowingly presenting false or perjured testimony, which is a breach of trust that can taint the entire proceeding.
Misconduct also includes failing to present the grand jury with known evidence that clearly exonerates the defendant. While prosecutors are not required to present the entire defense case, they cannot conceal evidence that negates guilt. Using the grand jury to harass a target or making inflammatory remarks to prejudice the jury are also grounds for dismissal.
How to Request Dismissal of an Indictment
A defendant must follow a formal process by filing a “Motion to Dismiss the Indictment” with the court. This motion must be filed before trial, shortly after the initial court appearance and arraignment. Failure to raise these objections in a timely manner can result in waiving them as a defense.
The written motion must state the specific legal grounds for dismissal, referencing applicable facts and rules. It must be supported by legal arguments and evidence, such as grand jury transcripts. After the motion is filed, the court may hold a hearing for both sides to present arguments before the judge makes a decision.
What Happens After an Indictment is Dismissed
The outcome depends on the judge’s order. A dismissal “without prejudice” is more common and allows the prosecutor to correct the error. For example, if an indictment was dismissed for a procedural error, the prosecutor could present the case to a new grand jury for a new indictment.
A dismissal “with prejudice” is more significant, as it permanently bars the prosecutor from refiling the same charges. This is reserved for severe circumstances, such as irreparable constitutional rights violations or intentional prosecutorial misconduct.