Opinion ID: 2402261
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: The Reinstatement Of Victor's Indictment

Text: The record is unclear with respect to whether Victor was sworn and then refused to testify or whether he refused even to take an oath. What is clear is that he was on sound constitutional ground when he refused to give evidence because it might tend to incriminate him. Whether or not his indictment had been dismissed with prejudice (a term that is more widely used in civil practice), it was dismissed before the trial began, and therefore he was subject to being re-indicted for the same offense, Commonwealth v. Smith, 244 S.W.2d 724 (1951). [2] Therefore, any distinction that the parties hereto have attempted to draw between the right of the Trial Court to reinstate an indictment that was dismissed with prejudice or the right of the Trial Court to set aside a previous order dismissing the indictment, is moot, and we make no ruling with reference thereto. Moreover, we express no opinion with respect to the use of Victor's confession in any subsequent trial.