Imagine you're a federal prosecutor. You do not like the law that requires you to turn over evidence in your possession that is favorable to the defense - so called Brady material. You devise an ingenius scheme.
You won't hand over any Brady material. If you finally get caught holding onto to the Brady material, and a judge threatens to dismiss your case as punishment, you have a card up your sleeve: You will simply dismiss the case without prejudice. (In contrast to a dismissal with prejudice, a prosecutor who dismisses a case without prejudice may refile the case.) After a few months, you will come up with a justification to refile the case.
Genius, isn't it?
It's not so genius when the judge you're gaming is U.S. District Court Judge Emmet Sullivan. Judge Sullivan presided over the prosecution of former Senator Ted Stevens. And so the federal prosecutors in the Zhenli Ye Gon case are learning that Judge Sullivan is not a prosecutor-in-a-robe, and he is not one to trifle with.
Mike Scarcella (remember the name) has provided excellent coverage of the prosecutorial misconduct in Ye Gon. His most recent post is must-read stuff: "Federal Judge Questions DOJ Motivation to Dismiss Drug Case."
For background, don't miss Scarcella's other two posts: "Defense Lawyers Want Charges Dismissed with Prejudice in Ye Gon Case"; DOJ Moves to Dismiss Charges in Major Drug Trafficking Conspiracy."