Ohio Rev. Code » Chapter 2945
Ohio Revised Code

Ohio Rev. Code § 2945.20 (2026)

Separate trial for capital offense

✓ 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
 

When two or more persons are jointly indicted for a capital offense, each of such persons shall be tried separately. The court, for good cause shown on application therefor by the prosecuting attorney or one or more of the defendants, may order said defendants to be tried jointly.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 6 cases, 1968–2016 · leading case: Kansas v. Kansas, 577 U.S. 108 (2016).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Kansas v. Kansas, 577 U.S. 108 (2016). · cites it 2× “§99–15–47 (2015) (same); Ohio Rev. Code Ann. §2945.20 (Lexis 2014) (capi- tal defendants shall be tried separately unless good cause is shown for a joint trial).”
State v. Griffin, 2013-Ohio-5481, 4 N.E.3d 989. · cites it 2× “Then, as now, R.C. 2945.20 required separate trials for defendants jointly indicted for a capital offense, and the murder statute stated, “Aggravated murder, and any offense for which death may be imposed as a penalty, is a capital offense.”
State v. Henry, 446 N.E.2d 436 (Ohio 1983). · cites it 4× “14 and R.C. 2945.20. The appellant, state of Ohio, contends that as a consequence of the United States Supreme Court decision in Furman v.”
State v. Coleman, 544 N.E.2d 622 (Ohio 1989). “” The use of the word “shall” makes it mandatory for all jointly indicted defendants to be tried separately unless the trial court orders a joint trial pursuant to the strict mandates set forth in Crim.”
State v. Perod, 239 N.E.2d 100 (Ohio Ct. App. 1968). · cites it 2× “When two or more persons are jointly indicted for a capital offense, Section 2945.20, Revised Code, provides that each of such persons shall be tried separately, but the court for good cause shown on application therefor by the prosecuting attorney or one or more of the…”
State v. Brown, 508 N.E.2d 1030 (Ohio Ct. App. 1st Dist. 1986). “R.C. 2945.20. The appellant argues that the statute provides her with alternative rights: the right to a separate trial or, if she chooses to waive that right, the right to a joint trial.”
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.