56.087. Dismissal of complaints, information, indictments, or counts by prosecuting or circuit attorneys without consent of the court — procedure. — 1. The prosecuting or circuit attorney has the power, in his or her discretion, to dismiss a complaint, information, or indictment, or any count or counts thereof, and in order to exercise that power it is not necessary for the prosecutor or circuit attorney to obtain the consent of the court. The dismissal may be made orally by the prosecuting or circuit attorney in open court, or by a written statement of the dismissal signed by the prosecuting or circuit attorney and filed with the clerk of court.
2. A dismissal filed by the prosecuting or circuit attorney prior to the time double jeopardy has attached is without prejudice. A dismissal filed by the prosecuting or circuit attorney after double jeopardy has attached is with prejudice, unless the criminal defendant has consented to having the case dismissed without prejudice.
3. A dismissal without prejudice means that the prosecutor or circuit attorney has complete discretion to refile the case, as long as it is refiled within the time specified by the applicable statute of limitations. A dismissal with prejudice means that the prosecutor or circuit attorney cannot refile the case.
4. For the purposes of this section, double jeopardy attaches in a jury trial when the jury has been impaneled and sworn. It attaches in a court-tried case when the court begins to hear evidence.
Notes of Decisions
State of Missouri v. Sylvester R. Sisco II, 458 S.W.3d 304 (Mo. 2015).
· cites it 10× “087, 5 which provides that the prosecutor “has the power, in his or her discretion, to dismiss a complaint, information, or indictment, or any count or counts thereof without the consent of the court. Unless double jeopardy has attached, a dismissal by the prosecutor will be…”
State v. Storer, 368 S.W.3d 293 (Mo. Ct. App. 2012).
· cites it 22× “This Court declines to engage in such an analysis because regardless of whether the dismissal was constitutionally proper, which would be a question of first impression in this state, it was nevertheless statutorily proper under section 56.087 and is therefore affirmed.”
State of Missouri v. Robert L. Henry, 568 S.W.3d 464 (Mo. Ct. App. 2019).
· cites it 4× “1; and (4) the trial court clearly erred in denying his motion to dismiss the State’s charges against him because § 56.087 is unconstitutional. The State concedes error for part of Point I, instructional error regarding Counts III and IV.”
State v. Moad, 398 S.W.3d 904 (Mo. Ct. App. 2013).
· cites it 23× “On August 7, 2012, Moad filed a motion to dismiss pursuant to section 56.087, 4 citing State v. Storer, 368 S.”
State of Missouri v. Levi Scott Elliott, 502 S.W.3d 59 (Mo. Ct. App. 2016).
· cites it 6× “It is well-settled that a prosecutor has great discretion in whether to pursue charges against a defendant, which has been codified in section 56.087. Id. Section 56.087 provides that the prosecutor “has the power, in his or her discretion, to dismiss a complaint, information,…”
State of Missouri v. Ray James Juniel, 568 S.W.3d 504 (Mo. Ct. App. 2019).
· cites it 4× “"This discretion has been codified in section 56.087, which provides that the prosecutor 'has the power, in his or her discretion, to dismiss a complaint, information, or indictment, or any count or count thereof['] without the consent of the court.”
State of Missouri v. Rayan M. Alqabbaa, 525 S.W.3d 121 (Mo. Ct. App. 2016).
· cites it 5× “Analysis Section 56.087, RSMo Cum.Supp. (2006) is central to the resolution of the issue before us and states: 1.”
Buford v. Cassady (E.D. Mo. 2021).
· cites it 15× “087 , Petitioner now contends that his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to seek the dismissal of all the refiled charges pursuant to Mo. Rev. Stat. §56.087 prior to his second trial.”
State of Missouri v. Clarence Battle, 685 S.W.3d 47 (Mo. Ct. App. 2024).
· cites it 5× “This Court finds no double jeopardy violation exits because under § 56.087, RSMo 2016, 1 the first indictment was superseded by the second indictment.”
State of Missouri v. Gregorio L. Davis, 607 S.W.3d 795 (Mo. Ct. App. 2020).
· cites it 3× “" He then cited to section 56.087 RSMo., which grants the State complete discretion to dismiss and refile a case at any time before jeopardy attaches.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.