IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
May 2, 2006
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF,
MAURICE R. SMITH, A/K/A "REECE," "CINCINNATI," AND "RICO," DEFENDANT.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter comes before the Court on the motion of the United States of America to dismiss the Superseding Indictment (Doc. 96). Dismissal of all or parts of an indictment at the government's request is governed by Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 48(a), which states in pertinent part, "The government may, with leave of court, dismiss an indictment. . . ." See In re: United States, 345 F.3d 450, 452 (7th Cir. 2003). Rule 48(a) does not explain the criteria for when the court should grant or deny leave, but it well-established, that the court's discretion in deciding to deny leave is very limited because the Constitution commits the authority to commence and pursue prosecutions with the Executive Branch, not the Judicial Branch, of the federal government. United States v. Martin, 287 F.3d 609, 623 (7th Cir. 2001); In re: Richards, 213 F.3d 773, 786 (3d Cir. 2000); United States v. Palomares, 119 F.3d 556, 558 (7th Cir. 1997); Const. Art. II, cl. 3.
In a telephone conference held May 2, 2006, the government informed the Court that it wishes to dismiss the Superseding Indictment without prejudice because the defendant has pled guilty to related state charges and prosecution in federal court is no longer necessary to achieve justice. This is a valid and proper reason for seeking dismissal of the Superseding Indictment.
Smith does not object to the dismissal. Accordingly, the Court GRANTS the motion (Doc. 96), AUTHORIZES the government to dismiss the Superseding Indictment (Doc. 43) without prejudice pursuant to Rule 48(a) and FINDS that the Superseding Indictment (Doc. 43) is DISMISSED without prejudice. This action is therefore DISMISSED without prejudice.
J. PHIL GILBERT, District Judge
© 1992-2006 VersusLaw Inc.