Court Opinion

ID: 9662768
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-23 23:17:40.800211+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:14:42.208819
License: Public Domain

OPINION ON STATE’S MOTION FOR REHEARING

McCORMICK, Presiding Judge.
We granted the State Prosecuting Attorney’s motion for rehearing in order to reexamine our holding that a trial court has the authority to quash the allegations of materiality in an indictment for aggravated perjury at a pretrial hearing. We find that Judge Clinton’s dissenting opinion on original submission is correct in its reasoning and its holding that in a pretrial setting there is neither Constitutional nor statutory authority for an accused to raise and for a trial court to determine sufficiency of evidence to support or defeat an alleged element of an offense such as “materiality” in a perjury case.
Accordingly, we adopt the conclusions in Part III of Judge Clinton’s dissenting opinion. The judgment of the Court of Appeals is reversed, the order of the trial court is set aside, and the cause remanded to the trial court for appellee to answer the indictment.
MANSFIELD, J., joins and files note.
OVERSTREET, J., dissents.