Kentucky Revised Statutes

Ky. Rev. Stat. § 533.258 (2026)

Effects of successful completion of pretrial diversion agreement

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section KY-LRCapps.legislature.ky.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

(1) If the defendant successfully completes the provisions of the pretrial diversion agreement, the charges against the defendant shall be listed as "dismissed-diverted" and shall not constitute a criminal conviction. (2) The defendant shall not be required to list this disposition on any application for employment, licensure, or otherwise unless required to do so by federal law. (3) Pretrial diversion records shall not be introduced as evidence in any court in a civil, criminal, or other matter without the consent of the defendant. Effective: July 15, 1998 History: Created 1998 Ky. Acts ch. 606, sec. 90, effective July 15, 1998.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 28 cases (9 in the last 5 years), 2000–2026 · leading case: Flynt v. Commonwealth, 105 S.W.3d 415 (Ky. 2003).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Flynt v. Commonwealth, 105 S.W.3d 415 (Ky. 2003). · cites it 5× “6 KRS 533.258 clarifies the nature and significance of pretrial diversion — i.”

Ballard v. Commonwealth, 320 S.W.3d 69 (Ky. 2010). · cites it 2× “” KRS 533.258(1) likewise requires that the charges be listed as “dismissed-diverted” upon successful completion of diversion.”

Gibson v. Commonwealth, 291 S.W.3d 686 (Ky. 2009). · cites it 2× “" KRS 533.258(1). Upon completion of the program, RCr 8.”

Helms v. Commonwealth, 475 S.W.3d 637 (Ky. Ct. App. 2015). “The diversion agreement may be voided “[i]f the defendant fails to complete the provisions of the pretrial diversion agreement within the time specified, or is not making satisfactory progress toward the completion of the provisions of the agreement!;.”

Thomas v. Commonwealth, 95 S.W.3d 828 (Ky. 2003). · cites it 2× “Similarly, KRS 533.258(1) states that “If the defendant successfully completes the provisions of the pretrial diversion agreement, the charges against the defendant shall be listed as ‘dismissed-diverted’ and shall not constitute a criminal conviction.”

Tucker v. Commonwealth, 295 S.W.3d 455 (Ky. Ct. App. 2009). · cites it 3× “After carefully reviewing the briefs, record, and oral arguments, we reverse and remand this case to the Washington Circuit Court with directions to dismiss the indictment and list this case as “Dismissed-Diverted” pursuant to KRS 533.258. We do so because we are persuaded that…”

Butts v. City of Bowling Green, 374 F. Supp. 2d 532 (W.D. Ky. 2005). “Further, Kentucky Revised Statutes § 533.258(1) states “[i]f the defendant successfully completes the provisions of the pretrial diversion agreement, the charges against the defendant shall be listed as ‘dismissed-diverted’ and shall not constitute a criminal conviction.”

State v. Gnewuch, 316 Neb. 47 (Neb. 2024). “47 The Supreme Court of Kentucky framed the question pre- sented in that case as whether “a circuit court has the authority to approve a pretrial diversion application over the Common wealth’s objection.”

Kentucky Bar Ass'n v. Haggard, 57 S.W.3d 300 (Ky. 2001). · cites it 2× “(1) If the defendant successfully completes the provision of the pretrial diversion agreement, the charges against the defendant shall be listed as "dismissed-diverted” and shall not constitute a criminal conviction.”

Commonwealth v. Derringer, 386 S.W.3d 123 (Ky. 2012). “Because Derringer was charged with being a PFO 2, we frame the question in the context of a PFO 2 charge. But the same analysis applies when determining whether a defendant can be charged with being a first-degree PFO.”

Commonwealth v. Shouse, 183 S.W.3d 204 (Ky. Ct. App. 2006). · cites it 3× “Shouse “dismissed” and specifically directed that the record reflect that the charge was “ ‘dismissed-diverted’ pursuant to KRS 533.258(1).” Three years later, in October 2004, Mr.”

Prather v. Commonwealth, 301 S.W.3d 20 (Ky. 2009). “” KRS 533.258(1). If the defendant fails to complete the diversion agreement, the diversion agreement can be voided by the trial court, and the court is to “proceed on the defendant’s plea of guilty in accordance with the law.”

Show all 28 citing cases →

— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 533.258(1) — 14 cases

Flynt v. Commonwealth, 105 S.W.3d 415 (Ky. 2003). “6 KRS 533.258 clarifies the nature and significance of pretrial diversion — i.”

Ballard v. Commonwealth, 320 S.W.3d 69 (Ky. 2010). “” KRS 533.258(1) likewise requires that the charges be listed as “dismissed-diverted” upon successful completion of diversion.”

Gibson v. Commonwealth, 291 S.W.3d 686 (Ky. 2009). “" KRS 533.258(1). Upon completion of the program, RCr 8.”

Thomas v. Commonwealth, 95 S.W.3d 828 (Ky. 2003). “Similarly, KRS 533.258(1) states that “If the defendant successfully completes the provisions of the pretrial diversion agreement, the charges against the defendant shall be listed as ‘dismissed-diverted’ and shall not constitute a criminal conviction.”

— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 533.258(2) — 2 cases

Flynt v. Commonwealth, 105 S.W.3d 415 (Ky. 2003). “6 KRS 533.258 clarifies the nature and significance of pretrial diversion — i.”

Commonwealth v. Shouse, 183 S.W.3d 204 (Ky. Ct. App. 2006). “Shouse “dismissed” and specifically directed that the record reflect that the charge was “ ‘dismissed-diverted’ pursuant to KRS 533.258(1).” Three years later, in October 2004, Mr.”

— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 533.258(3) — 1 case

Flynt v. Commonwealth, 105 S.W.3d 415 (Ky. 2003). “6 KRS 533.258 clarifies the nature and significance of pretrial diversion — i.”

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.