The prosecuting attorney shall not enter a nolle prosequi in any cause without leave of the court, on good cause shown, in open court. A nolle prosequi entered contrary to this section is invalid.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 33
cases (13 in the last 5 years), 1955–2026 · leading case: City of Lakewood v. Pfeifer, 613 N.E.2d 1079 (Ohio Ct. App. 8th Dist. 1992).
City of Lakewood v. Pfeifer, 613 N.E.2d 1079 (Ohio Ct. App. 8th Dist. 1992). · cites it 6דR.C. § 2941.33 provides that the prosecuting attorney may enter a nolle prosequi with leave of court on good cause shown and in open court.”
State v. Mucci, 782 N.E.2d 133 (Ohio Ct. App. 7th Dist. 2002). · cites it 3ד47 and 48(A) and R.C. 2941.33. The memorandum in *496 support stated that appellant was fully cooperative, as she had provided information to the prosecutor’s office and law enforcement; that her cooperation had assisted in the investigation of substantial drug trafficking to…”
State v. Pendleton, 2011-Ohio-2024. · cites it 6ד48(A) and R.C. §2941.33. {¶34} Initially, we note that R.”
State v. Williams, 2011-Ohio-6412. · cites it 3ד” ASSIGNMENT OF ERROR II “[WILLIAMS’] FEDERAL INDICTMENT FOR AN IDENTICAL OFFENSE DOES NOT CONSTITUTE ‘GOOD CAUSE’ TO JUSTIFY A NOLLE PROSEQUI AS REQUIRED BY R.C. 2941.33.” {¶4} In his first and second assignments of error, Williams argues that the trial court erred in granting…”
State ex rel. Steele v. McClelland (Slip Opinion), 2018-Ohio-4011, 116 N.E.3d 1267. · cites it 2דIn support, Steele argues that the dismissal entry is void because the trial court failed to determine that "good cause" existed as required by R.C. 2941.33 and because the trial judge and prosecutor referenced an incorrect case number in open court with regard to the state's…”
State v. Ramos, 2022-Ohio-886. · cites it 3ד” Similarly, R.C. 2941.33 provides that “[t]he prosecuting attorney shall not enter a nolle prosequi in any cause without leave of the court, on good cause shown, in open court.”
State v. Hopkins, 2025-Ohio-2102, 270 N.E.3d 1158. · cites it 3דSince he claims the nolle prosequi was invalid, Hopkins argues the speedy trial time has been running continuously and that more than 270 days had elapsed.4 {¶ 23} Crim.”
State v. Hammond, 2015-Ohio-4156. · cites it 3ד48 and R.C. 2941.33. {¶9} Pursuant to R.C. 2945.”
State v. Lenard, 2013-Ohio-1995. · cites it 2ד48(A)2 and noted, “[t]he above rules and statutes were enacted to 2 R.C. 2941.33 is substantially similar to the rule, stating “[t]he prosecuting curb unlimited discretion by the prosecutor’s office to enter a nolle prosequi without any court involvement.”
State v. Johnson, 588 N.E.2d 224 (Ohio Ct. App. 9th Dist. 1990). · cites it 2דUnder R.C. 2941.33: “The prosecuting attorney shall not enter a nolle prosequi in any cause without leave of the court, on good cause shown, in open court.”
State v. Sweet, 650 N.E.2d 450 (Ohio 1995). “48(A) and R.C. 2941.33. The court of appeals held that this argument was “essentially a minor modification of movant’s vindictive prosecution argument raised and ruled upon in his direct appeal,” and was, therefore, res judicata.”
State v. Andrews, 2024-Ohio-5023, 254 N.E.3d 782. “3d 613 (1996); R.C. 2941.33; and Crim.R. 48. However, Busch also recognized that “a court's resources in a domestic violence case are better used by encouraging a couple to receive counseling and ultimately issuing a dismissal than by going forward with a trial and impaneling a…”
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.