Part 1: Has anyone used a superseding indictment in which the grand jury returned an indictment actually marked or signified as "superseding" and under the same cause number as the original indictment (in other words, the grand jury actually signified an intent to supersede the original indictment)?

Part 2: Does anyone re-indict cases under the same cause number as the original indictment? If so, is there any specific authority, statutory or in a case, that permits the use of the same cause number in the re-indictment as in the original indictment, or is it just accepted practice in your jurisdiction?

Any help regarding authority for superseding indictments or keeping the same cause number would be greatly appreciated!

Williamson County uses the same cause number for reindicting cases. We do not use the designation "superceding indictment". I think of that as more of a federal term. The indictment does contain the word "Re-indictment" near the cause number in the heading.

No statutory authority exists that I know of and I do not believe any is needed. The CJIS reporting requirements and your computer software would dictate whether a separate new cause number might be needed in a particular fact situation.

If you would like to discuss further, feel free to contact me.

In Dallas, re-indictments received a new cause number. I believe that is the practice in Collin County, as well. The word re-indictment and the prior cause number would appear in the caption somewhere.

I don't believe you will find the terms "superseding indictment" or "reindictment" in either Article 20 or 21.

All of this really depends on the system used by your clerk and any related computer database used by the county. The Code of Criminal Procedure doesn't dictate any particular method.

True. Unfortunately, those decisions are increasingly driven by IT and budgetary officials who don't know anything about litigation and don't have to work with the consequences of their choices.

In my opinion, there is no such thing as a superseding indictment unless the second is filed with the same cause number as the original. Moreover, in that case it is probably better considered as the "amended" indictment.

The practice varies among the counties I've practiced in. Midland uses the same cause number for re-indictments while in the smaller counties you often get that glazed-eye look if you try something different than 'the way we've always done it'. If you change to a new cause number (and court's file), you typically need to obtain an order transferring file contents in order to maintain a complete record.