Drug charges dismissed in Burleigh County cases; attorneys mum on reason (2024)

Felony charges intwo fentanyl distributioncases in the Bismarck area were all dismissed earlier this month after the Burleigh County State's Attorney's office filed motions seeking to cancel prosecutions of two men from Illinois and two Burleigh County residents.

The reason is unclear.Burleigh County State's Attorney Julie Lawyerand defense attorneys for all four suspects would not comment to the Tribune, including on whether unexplained similarities in affidavits for the two unrelated incidents -- filed by the same police officer -- were a factor.

Assistant Burleigh County State's Attorney Daniel Vondrachek in an Aug. 2 motion asked a judge to dismiss the charge against James Porter of Danville, Illinois, writing "The facts and circ*mstances do not warrant further prosecution of said charges."

Similar motions were filed the same day in cases against Beaussan Jerome of Calumet City, Illinois, and Bismarck residents Walter Deville and Jaseyona Thomas.

All four suspects were charged with conspiracy to deliver a controlled substance - fentanyl. All faced potential maximum sentences of 10 years in prison and fines of up to $20,000.

During a brief appearance on Aug. 2 to announce he had signed the order dismissing Porter's case, South Central District Judge David Reich asked Vondrachek if the dismissal had anything to do with an impending federal prosecution. Sometimes drug cases are dismissed in state court if authorities intend to prosecute in federal court, where sentences for drug offenders are often much stiffer.

Vondrachek's reply was that he "preferred to defer to the language in the motion."The motion does not elaborate as to how facts or circ*mstances related to the case have changed since Porter's arrest.

A review of federal court records Friday did not indicate any federal charges filed against Porter or any of the other suspects.

The hearing in Porter's case was originally scheduled as a change-of-plea proceeding -- an indication that he intended to plead guilty.Porter was charged after his arrest on May 22 following the search of a Bismarck motel room, according to an affidavit.

Court documents indicate Porter pleaded not guilty to the charge at his arraignment following a preliminary hearing held in early July.He has been in custody at the Burleigh Morton Detention Center on a $50,000 cash bond.Jail records indicate he remains in custody on a parole violation warrant from Illinois.

Deville, Jerome and Thomas all entered not guilty pleas in their case and were scheduled to be tried beginning Sept. 12. All three had been held at the jail on $50,000 cash bonds following their arrests that also occurred at a Bismarck motel on May 22, according to affidavits.Jail records indicate all three have since been released.

The Tribune reviewed affidavits filed in the unrelated cases and found a number of similarities. Both incidents are reported as occurring on May 22 and both are written by the same Bismarck police officer, identified as Joseph Olsen.

Similarities might be expected in the affidavits filed in the cases against Thomas, Deville and Jerome, since all three were charged stemming from the same incident at a Bismarck motel. The affidavit in Porter's case states hisarrest took place at a different motel on the same day, yet it contains identical language regarding a person identified as "Gio" and Thomas' alleged involvement.

Affidavits in both incidents contain the exact same language stating Thomas was allegedly involved in transporting "Gio" to Bismarck for the purpose of selling pills. In both affidavits, Thomas reportedly admitted receiving roughly 1,200 pills from "Gio" over a period of a week, and Thomas admitted to selling some of those pills to support her own drug habit.

Affidavits in both incidentsalso state Deville admitted bringing "Gio" to Bismarck from Minot and that he had received a number of suspected fentanyl pills in exchange for transportation. Affidavits in the incident involving the three suspects identify "Gio" as being Jerome.

But the Porter case affidavit, despite referencing "Gio," Deville and Thomas, does not include any language linking them to Porter. Attorneys didn't comment on whether the reference in the Porter case affidavit was erroneous.