Case 1:24-cr-00556-DEH Document 129 Filed 02/18/25
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
ERIC ADAMS,
V.
Defendant.
Page 1 of 2
24 Cr. 556 (DEH)
ORDER
DALE E. HO, United States District Judge:
On February 14, 2025, the Government filed a “motion seeking dismissal without
prejudice of the charges in this case, with leave of the Court, pursuant to Rule 48(a) of the
Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure.” ECF No. 122 at 1. That Rule provides that “[t]he
government may, with leave of court, dismiss an indictment, information, or complaint.” Fed. R.
Crim. P. 48(a). As the Second Circuit has explained,
Rule [48(a)] was not promulgated to shift absolute power from the Executive to
the Judicial Branch. Rather, it was intended as a power to check power. The
Executive remains the absolute judge of whether a prosecution should be initiated
and the first and presumptively the best judge of whether a pending prosecution
should be terminated. The exercise of its discretion with respect to the termination
of pending prosecutions should not be judicially disturbed unless clearly contrary
to manifest public interest. In this way, the essential function of each branch is
synchronized to achieve a balance that serves both practical and constitutional
values.
United States v. Blaszczak, 56 F.4th 230, 240 (2d Cir. 2022) (quoting United States v. Smith, 55
F.3d 157, 158-59 (4th Cir. 1995)). The government’s determination to abandon a prosecution is
“entitled to great weight” and to a “presumption [of] good faith[,] … but it is not conclusive
upon the Court; otherwise there would be no purpose to Rule 48(a), which requires leave of
Court to enter the dismissal.” United States v. Greater Blouse, Skirt & Neckwear Contractors
Ass’n, 228 F. Supp. 483, 486 (S.D.N.Y. 1964) (Weinfeld, J.). Thus, “[w]hile there can be no
1
