The prosecuting attorney, with the permission of the court, may at any time before the case is finally submitted to the jury dismiss the indictment as to all or a part of the defendants and the dismissal shall not bar a future prosecution for the same offense.
History.
Crim. Code, § 242; C. & M. Dig., § 3063; Pope's Dig., § 3889; A.S.A. 1947, § 43-2127.
Case Notes
Multiple Defendants.
Any one of the defendants may be placed on trial when the cases of those preceding him have been dismissed. Borland v. State, 158 Ark. 37, 249 S.W. 591 (1923).
Nolle Prosequi.
Dismissal of indictment by nolle prosequi is not a bar to future prosecution for same offense. Moore v. State, 170 Ark. 697, 280 S.W. 657 (1926); Halton v. State, 224 Ark. 28, 271 S.W.2d 616 (1954).
Dismissal, or nolle prosequi, was not a bar to a future prosecution for the same offense as the effect was to set aside or annul the indictment. Jones v. State, 347 Ark. 455, 65 S.W.3d 402 (2002), cert. denied, Jones v. Arkansas, 536 U.S. 909, 122 S. Ct. 2366 (2002).
Because a trial court's granting of the state's motion to nol-pros resulted in a final order of dismissal and the state could not perfect an interlocutory appeal after it had the case dismissed, the state's interlocutory appeal under Ark. R. App. P. Crim. 3(a) was dismissed.
State v. C.W., 374 Ark. 116, 286 S.W.3d 118 (2008).
Denial of appellant's, an inmate's, petition for postconviction relief was proper because he failed to prove that he received the ineffective assistance of counsel. In part, although the inmate might have successfully quashed the amended information, he was not prejudiced by any resulting error, because the prosecutor would have simply refiled the charges since the state's dismissal of a case by nolle prosequi did not bar a subsequent prosecution under this section; Moreover, trial counsel appeared to have made a well-reasoned tactical decision not to object to the amendment.
Hoyle v. State, 2011 Ark. 321, 388 S.W.3d 901 (2011).
Gyronne Buckley v. Keith Ray, 848 F.3d 855 (8th Cir. 2017). “3d 736, 739 (2008) (citing Ark. Code Ann. § 16-89-122 ). Both parties agree that Buckley escaped jeopardy only on December 6, 2011 — one year after the nolle prosequi dismissal of the charges against him.”
State v. Crawford, 281 S.W.3d 736 (Ark. 2008). · cites it 2דIn this case, the State contends that it was error for the circuit court to dismiss the previously nol-prossed felony charge against Crawford based on its interpretation of Gaddy that where a charge is nol-prossed pursuant to a plea agreement it cannot later be refiled.”
State v. C.W., 286 S.W.3d 118 (Ark. 2008). · cites it 5דSee Ark. Code Ann. § 16-89-122 . The possibility of a subsequent prosecution does not affect the finality of the order.”
Hoyle v. State, 388 S.W.3d 901 (Ark. 2011). · cites it 4דIn its order denying postconviction relief, the trial court found that appellant’s defense was not prejudiced by the amendment and that, even had counsel successfully objected to the amendment, the prosecution would simply have nolle prossed the charges and filed a new…”
Jones v. State, 65 S.W.3d 402 (Ark. 2002). “Arkansas Code Annotated § 16-89-122 (1987) provides that the prosecuting attorney, with the permission of the court, may dismiss the indictment, and the dismissal will not be a bar to future prosecution for the same offense.”
State v. CW, 286 S.W.3d 118 (Ark. 2008). · cites it 5ד" Further, Ark.Code Ann. § 16-89-122 (Repl.2005) provides that an order granting the State's nolle prosequi motion "does not bar future prosecution for the same offense.”
Sturd v. Circuit Court of Lonoke Cnty., 370 S.W.3d 235 (Ark. 2010). · cites it 2ד3d 736, 739 (2008); Ark.Code Ann. § 16-89-122 (Repl.2006). However, where an indictment or information is unconditionally dismissed by the prosecuting attorney, this dismissal terminates the proceeding, and the same indictment or information cannot later be reinstated or resumed.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.