A Shadyside man whose indictment on a third-offense charge of driving under the influence was dismissed may not have escaped justice. It is a situation in which a "technicality" may have resulted in no more than a delay.
West Virginia law, like that in other states, contains a variety of procedural requirements - or "technicalities." One of them is that when someone is indicted for a crime, four copies of the indictment form must be signed by the county prosecuting attorney.
Jason Bradley Smith, of Shadyside, was indicted earlier this year by a Marshall County Grand Jury, on a third-offense DUI charge. Due to an oversight, a copy of the indictment handed to him during his arraignment was not signed.
That forced Circuit Judge Mark Karl to dismiss the indictment on Monday. He had no choice, under the state's Rules of Criminal Procedure.
But on his way out of the courtroom, Smith got potentially bad news from Prosecuting Attorney Jeffrey Cramer. "I'll sign the next one," Cramer told Smith.
He referred to his plan to present the case again to the November term of the Marshall County Grand Jury. Cramer said he already has told the police officer who investigated the case to refile the charge in magistrate court.
Smith is innocent until proven guilty, of course. His case may well proceed to trial, where he may be acquitted.
But we applaud Cramer's persistence. DUI offenders are threats to the public. Those who continue to drink and drive are indicating a complete and utter disregard for those they endanger - not to mention a scofflaw attitude toward law enforcement. They shouldn't be allowed to escape justice solely because of "technicalities." Cramer's attitude - one shared by most Northern Panhandle law enforcement officers and officials - is to keep the pressure up on DUI repeaters. That is the appropriate attitude toward them.