USA v. Baez-Soto

United States 	District Court
District of Massachusetts
United States 	of America,
V.
Garis 	Baez 	Soto,
Defendant .
---------------------
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Criminal Action No.
25-10393-NMG
MEMORANDUM 	& ORDER
GORTON, 	J.
In 	November , 	2025, 	the 	government 	moved 	to 	dismiss 	all
counts 	against 	defendant 	Garis 	Baez 	Soto 	("Soto u 	or 	"defendant u )
without 	prejudice 	(Docket 	No . 	19) . 	The 	Court 	granted 	that
motion 	(Docket 	No . 	21). 	Defendant 	thereafter 	moved 	to 	dismiss
with 	prejudice 	(Docket 	No . 	22) , 	which 	the 	government 	opposed
(Docket 	No. 	23) . 	For 	the 	reasons 	that 	follow , 	defendant ' s
motion 	will 	be 	denied .
While 	a 	district 	court 	has 	discretion 	to 	mandate 	dismissal
with 	prejudice , 	that 	drastic 	remedy 	is 	usually 	reserved 	for
cases 	in 	which 	the 	government 	acted 	in 	bad 	faith. 	See 	United
States 	v. 	Suazo , 	14 	F . 4th 	70, 	75 	(1st 	Cir . 	2021) 	(collecting
cases) . 	The 	Court 	finds 	that 	the 	government 	did 	not 	act 	in 	bad
faith 	in 	seeking 	dismissal 	without 	prejudice . 	The 	cases
defendant 	proffers 	in 	support 	of 	his 	motion 	are 	factually
distinguishable 	and 	demonstrate 	examples 	of 	prosecutorial 	bad
- 	1 	-
Case 1:25-cr-10393-NMG Document 24 Filed 12/29/25 Page 1 of 3

faith 	that 	are 	not 	present 	in 	the 	instant 	case , 	e . g . 	the
government 	ignoring 	the 	district 	court ' s 	warning 	that 	it 	was
concerned 	about 	the 	government ' s 	pattern 	of 	prosecuting 	and
deporting 	defendants 	and 	would 	consider 	dismissal 	with 	prejudice
should 	it 	continue. 	In 	the 	instant 	case , 	absent 	any 	evidence 	to
the 	contrary , 	the 	Court 	presumes 	that 	the 	government 	acted 	in
good 	faith. 	See 	Suazo , 	14 	F . 4th 	at 	73 .
Defendant 	also 	argues 	that 	his 	Sixth Amendment 	rights 	were
violated 	when 	he 	was 	deported 	while 	criminal 	charges 	were
pending . 	The 	Court 	finds 	that 	defendant 	was 	not 	prejudiced 	in
preparing 	a 	defense . 	The 	government 	promptly 	dismissed 	the
indictment 	when 	defendant , 	because 	of 	his 	deportation , 	was
unable 	to 	participate 	meaningfully 	in 	his 	defense . 	He 	will 	not
face 	the 	charges 	in 	the 	indictment 	unless 	he 	returns 	to 	the
United 	States 	and 	is 	arrested , 	at 	which 	point 	he 	would 	have 	the
constitutional 	right 	once 	again 	to 	participate 	in 	his 	own
defense . 	The 	Court 	has 	no 	reason 	to 	believe 	defendant 	will 	be
prejudiced 	in 	preparing 	a 	defense 	should 	that 	become 	necessary
in 	the 	future .
- 	2 	-
Case 1:25-cr-10393-NMG Document 24 Filed 12/29/25 Page 2 of 3

..
ORDER
For 	the 	reas o ns 	stated 	above , 	the 	Cour t 	will 	not 	mandate
dismissal 	with 	prejudice . 	Defendant ' s 	moti o n 	(Docket 	No . 	22 ) 	is
DENIED.
So 	ordered.
Nathaniel 	M. 	Gorfun
Sen i or 	United 	States 	District 	Judge
Dated : 	December l'f , 	2025
- 	3 	-
Case 1:25-cr-10393-NMG Document 24 Filed 12/29/25 Page 3 of 3