Friday at the Court

The Court hears oral argument in State v. Pierce today.

Pierce presents an interesting challenge on appeal. He is arguing that the information filed against him does not confer subject-matter jurisdiction because it was filed after a grand jury had ignored the charge. According to the Supreme Court press release: "Pierce argues the evidence demonstrates that a proceeding before a grand jury was held before the information was filed, and that the grand jury failed to indict; Pierce argues, consequently, his conviction based upon the information violated Article I, § 8 of the Idaho Constitution."

Article I, § 8 provides "that after a charge has been ignored by a grand jury, no person shall be held to answer, or for trial therefor, upon information of the public prosecutor." Now while some people might be skeptical of a claim that the prosecutor filed a charge after the grand jury failed to indict, the Dalling case reminds us to not assume all is kosher with grand jury proceedings. In Dalling, the Ada County prosecutors held a grand jury past the expiration of its term, without getting an order from District Court, in order to get an indictment before the statute of limitations expired. Alert defense counsel caught on and got the indictment dismissed. (For more information see State v. Dalling, 128 Idaho 203, 911 P.2d 1115 (1996).)