Wiseman drops sexual abuse case as key witnesses have left islands

Following the prosecution’s recommendations, Superior Court Associate Judge David A. Wiseman dismissed yesterday a sexual abuse case as key witnesses are no longer in the CNMI.

Wiseman granted the Attorney General’s Office’s motion to dismiss without prejudice the case against Noke Lee Rogopes.

“The court does not believe that a dismissal without prejudice at this time would expose the defendant to prosecutorial harassment or abuse,” he said.

Dismissal without prejudice refers to dismissal that leaves the plaintiff or prosecution free to try the case again later if circumstances change.

Wiseman said the crime alleged is serious enough that the government should not be barred from trying the case if the witnesses return to the CNMI.

The judge said the case will be dismissed without prejudice, but the government has until next year to re-file the case.

“If the witnesses central to the government’s case cannot be located within the next 12 months, then the case will be dismissed with prejudice at the expiration of one year from the issuance of this order,” he said.

Court records show that Rogopes was charged with sexual abuse of a minor in the second degree. The alleged crime occurred in April 2007. The AGO filed the case in October 2007.

Last July 28, the AGO filed a motion to dismiss without prejudice, citing that the victim has relocated out of the CNMI and hasn’t set a return date.

The AGO cited that a witness has relocated out of the CNMI and doesn’t plan to return, while another witness has relocated to Guam and doesn’t plan to return.

Based upon the unavailability of key witnesses at the time of the trial, the government filed the motion to dismiss.

Rogopes, through counsel Robert Torres, opposed the motion to dismiss the case without prejudice based on considerations of the right to a speedy trial and the procedural posture of the case.

Torres asserted that defendant would prefer the court to either dismiss the case with prejudice or allow it to proceed to trial.

In granting the motion to dismiss, Wiseman said he finds that the reason given is made in good faith and is not contrary to public policy.

“A dismissal with prejudice is a very harsh sanction against the government and should only be used in situations that merit such approbation. This is not one of those situations,” Wiseman said.