A client was charged twice with murder arising from the same homicide. Both prosecutions ended without a conviction. The firm's related federal civil rights litigation ultimately resolved for $5 million.

The first prosecution

The client was arrested and held while facing murder, felony murder, burglary, and weapons charges. After investigating the case and reviewing the grand jury presentation, Douglas L. Cody filed an extensive motion challenging the indictment. The defense identified material inaccuracies in the presentation and raised issues concerning investigative evidence, preservation of potentially important materials, and information favorable to the client. The motion did not ask the court to decide guilt or innocence; it asked whether the grand jury had received a fair and accurate account before authorizing prosecution.

In a written decision, the New Jersey Superior Court found that numerous material inaccuracies, considered together, deprived the grand jury of its constitutionally assigned function. The court dismissed the indictment while allowing prosecutors an opportunity to present the case to a new grand jury. When no new indictment was obtained within the court-established period, the firm secured the client's release without continued bail restrictions. The client had spent approximately 16 months in custody. The court's ruling expressly recognized that the State had presented a prima facie circumstantial case; its dismissal rested on the cumulative effect of inaccuracies in the grand jury presentation. That distinction matters to the nature of the result.

A second indictment and federal litigation

The firm filed a federal civil rights action concerning the investigation, arrest, detention, and prosecution. Discovery examined investigative records, physical evidence, witness accounts, and the decisions leading to the first indictment. Among the issues the firm pursued was the handling of the homicide victim's cellular telephone. The federal pleadings alleged that the physical device had not been identified in the original criminal discovery or separately recorded in the prosecutor's evidence system. After a federal subpoena sought the phone and its custody records, the prosecutor's office acknowledged possessing it. Those allegations were part of the civil case, not findings of wrongdoing.

While the civil action was pending, prosecutors obtained a second indictment on substantially similar charges. The firm again moved to dismiss and challenged the new grand jury presentation. Before the scheduled hearing, prosecutors sought dismissal, stating in part that the evidence was insufficient to prove guilt. The court dismissed the second indictment and discharged the client's bail conditions, including restrictions imposed during the second prosecution. This was a prosecutorial dismissal before the hearing on the defense motion, rather than a second judicial ruling granting that motion.

The civil resolution

The firm continued the federal case after the second prosecution ended. The district court denied summary judgment on surviving constitutional and state law claims concerning the probable cause determination by investigators and supervisors. The defendants appealed the summary judgment ruling. While the federal litigation remained pending, the parties settled the civil claims for $5,000,000. The settlement concluded the case without a trial determination of civil liability.

Result

The first indictment was dismissed on the defense motion; prosecutors sought dismissal of the second for insufficient evidence; and the federal civil rights case settled for $5 million.

The settlement was a negotiated resolution and did not constitute an admission of liability by the defendants.

Past results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Results depend on the particular facts and legal circumstances of each matter.