Hope this helps. Interesting reading the Criminal Prosecution section of the article. http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/dismissal Dismissal with Prejudice A dismissal with prejudice bars the government from prosecuting the accused on the same charge at a later date. The defendant cannot subsequently be reindicted because of the constitutional guarantee against Double Jeopardy. A dismissal with prejudice is made in response to a motion to the court by the defendant or by the court sua sponte. Dismissal without Prejudice A dismissal without prejudice that permits the reindictment or retrial of a defendant on the same charge at a subsequent date may be granted by a court acting sua sponte or after the prosecuting attorney has made a motion to do so. Only nonconstitutional grounds that do not adversely affect the rights of the defendant, such as the crowding of court calendars, might be sufficient to warrant the dismissal of a criminal action without prejudice. Having read this info, my question is the judge privy to the potential evidence of the case before the case is/is not dismissed?
From JRN: New Motion Asks Charges In Bobo Case Be Dropped December 30, 2014 Defense attorneys in the Holly Bobo case are now demanding that all charges against the two prime suspects be dismissed. ... At the recent hearing, Judge McGinley ordered the prosecution to provide additional discovery by December 24 -- one week ago. Long said the state missed that deadline, and insisted that he's received nothing linking the suspects to a homicide. Link: http://www.jrn.com/newschannel5/news/New-Motion-Asks-Charges-In-Bobo-Case-Be-Dropped-287133481.html NOTE: This Motion pertains to the judge's order issued at the 12-17-14 Hearing.
Good point , but he may not even have to "get mad" ... he has to consider the law in the purest sense ... if there is no solid information against the accused it becomes illegal to hold them in jail. I suspect there was maybe enough seemingly convincing evidence when the arrests were made but was it just hearsay ?? ie: .... grandpa said that one grandson said that the other grandson had Holly in his house ..... yet now it appears that first grandson is also charged with rape and if he does not testify all that is left is the hearsay .... and that is not enough (I dont think) The judge may have no choice but release them. Yikes !!!
According to Chris Conte Jennifer Nichols has been appointed by the Judge to oversee and prosecute the Holly Bobo case. https://www.facebook.com/NC5ChrisConte?fref=nf http://www.jrn.com/newschannel5/new...For-Holly-Bobo-Murder-Suspects-287683691.html
Surprise, Jennifer Nichols was the attorney that wanted off the case due to Stowe, well her boss wanted her off the case. That was when Stowe and TBI were arguing. As long as they can prosecute these guys, no problem.
