State v. Beaudion
Annotate this CaseNev. Rev. Stat. 172.241 affords the target of a grand jury investigation the opportunity to testify before them. To facilitate exercise of that right, the statute requires that the target be given reasonable notice of the grand jury proceeding unless, after holding a closed hearing on the matter, the district court determines that adequate cause exists to withhold target notice. In this case, as grounds for withholding target notice from Defendant, the district attorney filed a written request and supporting affidavit asserting that Defendant would threaten or harm the victim and/or her family to prevent the victim from testifying. The district judge supervising the grand jury entered an order authorizing the State to withhold target notice without conducting a face-to-face hearing. The district judge to whom the criminal case was assigned after the indictment was entered granted Defendant’s motion to dismiss, concluding that the failure to hold the hearing rendered the indictment procedurally defective. The Supreme Court reversed, holding that section 172.241’s procedure for withholding notice is met if the State presents sufficient evidence to the district court, through written application and/or at oral argument, to allow the court to conclude by written order that adequate cause to withhold notice of the grand jury proceedings exists.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.