photo by: Chris Conde

Ryan M. Reeves expresses relief after his charges are temporarily dropped until the case of his codefendant, Daoud L. Holmes, goes to trial in July. Reeves, who has been accused of sexual assault, is seen here at his preliminary hearing on March 4, 2022, in Douglas County District Court.

Charges were temporarily dropped Friday against a man accused of the rape of a 19-year-old woman.

The man, Ryan M. Reeves, 22, of Dallas, is one of two men accused of raping the woman in January 2020 in Douglas County. The charges were dropped after Reeves’ codefendant, Daoud L. Holmes, 21, of Kansas City, Missouri, was called to testify in the preliminary hearing Friday but Holmes’ attorney objected to the subpoena.

Nicholas Vrana, senior assistant district attorney, wanted to compel Holmes to testify in the case against Reeves, and the state offered him an immunity agreement for his testimony; however, the state still plans to prosecute Holmes on the same charge.

Holmes’ defense attorney, Josh Luttrell, said that it was impossible for Holmes to be compelled to testify because he would be forced to surrender his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination and could run the risk of perjuring himself on the stand if his statements do not match the statements he gave to police when he was arrested.

photo by: Chris Conde/Journal-World

Daoud L. Holmes looks on as Judge Sally Pokorny decides whether he can be compelled to testify in a rape case on March 4, 2022, during a preliminary hearing for codefendant Ryan M. Reeves in Douglas County District Court.

Vrana said that Holmes’ statements in court against Reeves would not be admissible in a case against Holmes, and he said that the prosecuting team would recuse itself in Holmes’ trial, meaning another set of prosecutors who hadn’t heard the testimony would be responsible for charging Holmes’ case to ensure Holmes’ testimony would not be brought into question later.

Luttrell said that it was unheard of to offer immunity for testimony to someone who is being charged with the same crime and even if the prosecution recused itself, Holmes’ testimony would still be on record.

Judge Sally Pokorny said that it was an unusual request that the prosecution was making and called a recess to give all parties a chance to review the immunity agreement in the context of similar cases.

“I’m not willing to make a decision by the seat of my robe,” Pokorny said.

After the recess, Pokorny ruled that there was precedent to allow the immunity order to be granted and for Holmes to testify against Reeves but said there could be unseen consequences for the prosecution down the line by using Holmes’ testimony now.

Pokorny ordered another recess to allow the prosecution to clarify the language in the immunity agreement to meet the defense’s objections, but when the court resumed prosecutor Vrana moved to dismiss the charges against Reeves until the case against Holmes could be settled and to avoid any further confusion with the immunity order for an open case.

The charges against Reeves were dropped and his bond was released without restriction. Vrana said the district attorney’s office intended to refile charges after Holmes’ case is resolved.

Holmes remains free on a $50,000 bond and is scheduled for a jury trial on July 18.

As the Journal-World previously reported, the two men are accused of engaging in sexual intercourse with an individual who was incapable of giving consent, according to separate charging documents provided to the Journal-World. The alleged victim listed in both cases is the same person.

Holmes still faces the level-one person felony charge, which comes with a minimum sentence of 147 months in prison for offenders who have little to no criminal history, according to Kansas sentencing guidelines.