dismissal

PCHAPTER 11

DISMISSAL IN THE INTERESTS OF JUSTICE

§ 11.01 Dismissal in the Interests of Justice

§ 11.01

Dismissal in the Interests of Justice

Rule 48(b)(2) allows a judge to dismiss any case, with
or without prejudice, on the broadly discretionary
ground that "such dismissal will serve the ends of
justice and the effective administration of the
court's business." The rule is meant in part as a
housekeeping device, to get rid of de minimis
charges,{1} and to clear backlogged cases (even if
there has been no violation of the speedy trial
guidelines).{2}

But it is not restricted to these situations, nor does
a Rule 48(b) dismissal require constitutional
reasons.{3} A judge can therefore dismiss in the
interests of justice as a sanction for police
misconduct for which the constitution provides only a
lesser remedy (such as suppression) or no remedy at
all (e.g., where gross police misconduct produces no
incriminating evidence).{4}

Prosecutorial misconduct can also warrant dismissal
under the rule: a state's attorney's attempt to avoid
scheduling orders warrants dismissal with prejudice in
the interests of justice,{5} and other misconduct can
have the same consequence. For example, even if a case
is not dismissable as of right under the stringent
standards for selective and vindictive
prosecutions,{6} elements of selectivity or
vindictiveness may warrant dismissal under the rule.

A motion to dismiss in the interests of justice is
also appropriate in "sympathy cases," where the facts
show technical guilt together with substantial
mitigating circumstances; or where a mandatory minimum
sentence which would have to be imposed on conviction
would be unjust on the particular facts.{7}

ENDNOTES

1. V.R.Cr.P. 48(b), Reporter's Notes.

2. V.R.Cr.P. 48(b), Reporter's Notes; State v. Snide,
   144 Vt. 436, 440 (1984).

3. V.R.Cr.P. 48(b), Reporter's Notes to the 1989
   Amendment.

4. Rule 48(b)'s authority to dismiss is a codification
   of inherent judicial powers. See V.R.Cr.P. 48(b),
   Reporter's Notes to the 1989 Amendment (citing United
   States v. Furey, 514 F.2d 1098 (2d Cir. 1976); United
   States v. Simmons, 536 F.2d 827 (9th Cir. 1976); and
   C. Wright, Federal Practice and Procedure § 814, at
   209 (1982)).

5. State v. Jones, 157 Vt. 553 (1991).

6. See chapter 15, infra.

7. Dismissal in the interests of justice may be
   appropriate even after conviction. See State v.
   Kimber, No. 84-309 (Vt. July 11, 1986) (unpublished)
   (raised but not decided).
   ittsley v. Warish,

---

Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com