Ohio Rev. Code » Chapter 2945
Ohio Revised Code

Ohio Rev. Code § 2945.08 (2026)

Prosecution in wrong county - proceeding

✓ laws through the 2026 session (checked Sept. 2026)
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ORCcodes.ohio.gov (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
Effective:
October 1, 1953
Latest Legislation:
House Bill 1 - 100th General Assembly
PDF:
Download Authenticated PDF
 

If it appears, on the trial of a criminal cause, that the offense was committed within the exclusive jurisdiction of another county of this state, the court must direct the defendant to be committed to await a warrant from the proper county for his arrest, but if the offense is a bailable offense the court may admit the defendant to bail with sufficient sureties conditioned, that he will, within such time as the court appoints, render himself amenable to a warrant for his arrest from the proper county, and if not sooner arrested thereon, will appear in court at the time fixed to surrender himself upon the warrant.

The clerk of the court of common pleas shall forthwith notify the prosecuting attorney of the county in which such offense was committed, in order that proper proceedings may be had in the case. A defendant in such case shall not be committed nor held under bond for a period of more than ten days.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 2 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 2012–2023 · leading case: State v. Hampton, 2012-Ohio-5688, 983 N.E.2d 324.
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Hampton, 2012-Ohio-5688, 983 N.E.2d 324. · cites it 3× “” Remedy {¶ 43} R.C. 2945.08 sets forth the manner in which a trial court should proceed when it is established that the offense occurred in a county different from the one where the trial is being conducted: “If it appears, on the trial of a criminal cause, that the offense was…”
State v. Coffee, 2023-Ohio-474. “Therefore, two out of the three conditions in R.C. 2945.08(D)(1) are satisfied. If Coffee’s sentences are authorized by law, then the third condition is satisfied and the sentences are not reviewable on appeal.”
Ohio Rev. Code § 2945.08(D)(1): 1 case
State v. Coffee, 2023-Ohio-474. “Therefore, two out of the three conditions in R.C. 2945.08(D)(1) are satisfied. If Coffee’s sentences are authorized by law, then the third condition is satisfied and the sentences are not reviewable on appeal.”
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.