State v. Belleque

A defect in an indictment or a defective waiver of an indictment or preliminary hearing does not divest a trial court of subject matter jurisdiction.

Defendant was convicted of unlawful use of a weapon. He assigned error to the trial court’s finding of probable cause at a preliminary hearing because the court declined to consider the affirmative justifications of self-defense, defense of premise, and defense of property. Defendant argued that the court conducted a flawed probable cause analysis which deprived the court of subject matter jurisdiction for his eventual conviction. The State argued that “requiring the State to disprove self-defense beyond a reasonable doubt … is inconsistent with the purpose and the burden” of the State. A defect in an indictment or a defective waiver of an indictment or preliminary hearing does not divest a trial court of subject matter jurisdiction. A post-trial review of the sufficiency of evidence presented at a preliminary hearing is analogous to a post-trial review of evidence presented at a grand jury proceeding, no useful purpose will be served by such a review, because the sufficient of the evidence to convict was tested at trial. Both proceedings are a test of a district attorney’s charging authority, evidence is developed and tested at trial. Affirmed.