Torres: Injustice corrected, Onopey can now move on
Robert T. Torres, who represents Tim Onopey in the sexual assault case that was affirmed dismissed by the Supreme Court last week, says his client can now move forward from the injustice that has now been corrected.
Last week, the Supreme Court affirmed an order by the trial court dismissing the charges against Tim Onopey with prejudice.
The Commonwealth charged Onopey with first degree sexual assault, but later moved to dismiss the charge after the complaining witness changed her testimony. The prosecution asked the court to dismiss the case without prejudice, which would allow it to re-file charges against Onopey in the future.
In a statement from Torres, he said while his client was wrongfully charged and suffered an injustice, he is thankful that the Supreme Court exists to check against it. Fortunately, Onopey can now move on from this case.
“This case reminds us that the rule of law is that the guilty are convicted and punished and the innocent are free. While the prosecutor’s job is to do justice, thankfully the courts exist to check against injustice. Defenders don’t represent criminals as is often misunderstood; we defend every person’s constitutional rights. Yours. Here the government knew the evidence before it was that Tim Onopey was innocent and yet it persisted in dismissal without prejudice for no good reason. That was not justice and while the Supreme Court found there was no bad faith in seeking dismissal, we also know that the motion to dismiss was certainly not made in good faith. The Supreme Court in its decision underscored the court’s role in checking against improper dismissals intended to harass or intimidate defendants. Wrongfully charged and an injustice corrected, Tim Onopey can now try to move on with his life from this case,” he said.
According to an article on the Saipan Tribune, Onopey objected, asking the court to dismiss with prejudice, preventing the prosecution from re-filing the charges against him.
The lower court sided with Onopey, dismissing the case with prejudice after finding the prosecution’s motion to dismiss was made in bad faith.
The Commonwealth appealed, arguing that all such dismissals must be without prejudice and that the prosecution may always re-file charges as long as the statute of limitations has not expired.
In its opinion, the Supreme Court found that the trial court was incorrect to find bad faith in holding that the prosecution’s motion to dismiss was made in bad faith, but affirmed the court’s order dismissing the case without the possibility to re-file charges.
The Supreme Court found that the trial court has authority to manage the terms of dismissal, and that it was not an abuse of the court’s discretion to dismiss the case with prejudice, since the prosecution did not provide the court any reason to allow it time to continue its investigation or re-file charges against Onopey.
Robert T. Torres
