Ridgeway Unified Courts

JUDICIAL COUNCIL OF RIDGEWAY

Searchable full text

2,839 characters extracted

—

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF RIDGEWAY CITATION: State of Ridgeway v. xJvmma, 2022 RSC 821 DATE OF JUDGEMENT: December 23, 2022 BETWEEN: State of Ridgeway Plaintiff and xJvmma Accused REASONS FOR JUDGEMENT ON MOTION TO DISMISS OF THE HONOURABLE JUDGE KOALAMEDVEDEVA I. Background [1] The accused moves to dismiss the Indictment substantially for the reasons that the grand jury’s composition was inconsistent with the Rules of Criminal Procedure and therefore rendered the Indictment returned by it null, and further that the composition of the grand jury prejudiced the accused and violated her right to due process of law. [2] First, the accused submits that the grand jury by which she was indicted was comprised grand jurors who were not “licensed attorneys”, as required by Rules of Criminal Procedure, thus rendering the Indictment returned by that grand jury null. Second, the accused submits that a grand jury comprised of state actors—in this case, peace officers—was a violation of due process, similar to how a single judge acting as the entire grand jury would be one.1 [3] At all relevant times, title 2, rule 5(a) of the Rules of Criminal Procedure provided that: “Jurors for grand juries may only be selected from a pool of licensed attorneys serving within the state”. II. The Evidence [4] I am not satisfied that the accused’s evidence can support a finding that the grand jury which returned the Indictment against the accused was not empanelled from a pool of licensed attorneys. The accused’s evidence to support the allegation that the grand jury was comprised of peace officers was apparently derived from one person’s 1 In re Murchison, 349 U. S. 133 (1955). posts on a social media thread. It is reckless if not utterly irresponsible to rely on evidence of this sort and I wholly reject it. [5] The government correctly points out that the accused’s evidence in support of their argument contains purely of hearsay evidence. I do not, however, accept the government’s assertion that the Rules of Evidence apply to evidence used in the finding of fact in the course of deciding motions to dismiss in the same way that they apply to evidence at trial. I also do not accept their assertion that grand jury proceedings are not governed by the Rules of Criminal Procedure. [6] In any case, I have no reason to believe that the grand jury was illegitimately empanelled to the extent of its composition’s adherence to the Rules of Criminal Procedure. III. Conclusion [7] Analysis of the law of due process is unnecessary. [8] The motion to dismiss is denied. Dated at the City of Palmer, in the State of Ridgeway this 23rd day of December, 2022. “koalaMedvedeva” Judge koalaMedvedeva Counsel for the plaintiff State of Ridgeway: RyanJSyndicate and JoshLocke, Ridgeway. Counsel for the accused xJvmma: CIifford2, Ridgeway.

MotionRuling_RSC-CM-821_2045-122322.pdf

Original document

Searchable full text

Document record