Robert Wiesner faces one less felony criminal charge, but one more is up in the air for now.

Wiesner is one of four defendants accused of participating in a bid-rigging scheme that involved county-connected local development corporations. He faced two felony charges as part of the case, which is being handled by the State Attorney General’s Office.

This afternoon, State Supreme Court Justice Robert Noonan issued a long-awaited decision on the charges against Wiesner. Noonan agreed to dismissal of both charges, but granted the Attorney General’s Office permission to re-present the second charge to a new grand jury.

Wiesner’s attorney, James Nobles, had previously asked Noonan to dismiss both charges. He said his client hadn’t had a chance to testify before a grand jury, even though he’d asked to do so.

The Attorney General’s Office agreed to dropping the charges, but asked for permission to present them to a new grand jury.
Nobles also argued that the charges were political and the case marred by misconduct, including an AG’s Office staff member notifying members of the media about the charges before an indictment was made public. In his decision, Noonan said the action was inappropriate, but didn’t appear to be “politically motivated or malevolent” based on confidential communications he reviewed.

This article appears in Aug 6-12, 2014.

Covers county government and whatever else comes my way. Greyhound dad; vegetarian; attempted photographer with a love for film and fixer; sometimes cyclist.

3 replies on “Wiesner case to head back to grand jury”

  1. I think there is a difference between “can” and “will” resubmit to the grand jury. The AGs office abused it’s power with the perp walk. The most serious charge is dropped, the AG looks inept, and, in the context of the Moreland commission flap, reintroducing will look way too political! (which, it is)

    I would bet that someone was trying to broker an ACD (adjournment contemplating dismissal) in this case. ..since it was so weak. Now the AG has to decide to focus on his reelection. I am not sure this will be reintroduced…besides, how do you draw an impartial jury?

  3. I have no fan of Maggie Brooks or her husband, but I think this prosecution is politically motivated and the evidence is as thin as water. It is too bad the A.G.’s office overplayed their hand on this one.

Comments are closed.