Opinion
Criminal Action No. 2004-0005
07-02-2020
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. KALISHA MARTIN, et al., Defendants.
Attorney: Alessandra P. Serano, Esq., St. Thomas, U.S.V.I For the United States
Attorney:
Alessandra P. Serano, Esq.,
St. Thomas, U.S.V.I
For the United States ORDER
THIS MATTER comes before the Court on the "Government's Motion to Dismiss," wherein the Government "requests that the Superseding Indictment . . . in this matter be dismissed without prejudice as to [Kalisha Martin] in the interest of justice." (Dkt. No. 1475). No response has been filed to the Government's Motion.
Pursuant to Fed. R. Crim. P. 48(a), "[t]he government may, with leave of court, dismiss an indictment, information, or complaint." The amount of discretion that a court may exercise under Rule 48(a) is limited. See Rinaldi v. United States, 434 U.S. 22, 29 n.15 (1977). Indeed, "[a] court is generally required to grant a prosecutor's Rule 48(a) motion to dismiss unless dismissal is clearly contrary to manifest public interest." In re Richards, 213 F.3d 773, 787 (3d Cir. 2000) (internal quotation and citation omitted). Rule 48(a) dismissals are customarily granted without prejudice, thus permitting the government to reindict the defendant within the statute of limitations. United States v. Galloway, 2013 WL 4712042, at *1 (D.V.I. Aug. 30, 2013) (citing United States v. Raineri, 42 F.3d 36, 43 (1st Cir. 1994)).
The Court finds that dismissal is appropriate here, as there is no evidence in the record to suggest that dismissal would be "clearly contrary to manifest public interest." Richards, 213 F.3d at 787.
UPON CONSIDERATION of the foregoing, it is hereby
ORDERED that the "Government's Motion to Dismiss" (Dkt. No. 1475) is GRANTED; and it is further
ORDERED that the Superseding Indictment (Dkt. No. 544) is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE as to Defendant Kalisha Martin.
SO ORDERED. Date: July 2, 2020
/s/_________
WILMA A. LEWIS
Chief Judge