A. The court may either of its own motion or upon the application of the district attorney, upon the furtherance of justice, order an action or indictment to be dismissed; but in that case the reasons of the dismissal must be set forth in the order, which must be entered upon the minutes. B. The district attorney may dismiss an action or indictment by filing a notice of dismissal at any time prior to commencement of the preliminary hearing in the case of a felony or, in the case of a misdemeanor, prior to the matter being set for trial. Any subsequent request for dismissal of an action or indictment by the district attorney must be made pursuant to the provisions of subsection A of this section. A defendant named in such action or indictment shall not be required to pay the costs of that action unless the court exercises its discretion and the parties agree. R.L. 1910, § 6099. Amended by Laws 2016, c. 204, § 1, eff. Nov. 1, 2016; Laws 2022, c. 29, § 1, eff. Nov. 1, 2022.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
24
cases, 1958–2005 · leading case:
State v. Robinson, 544 P.2d 545 (Okla. Crim. App. 1975).
State v. Robinson, 544 P.2d 545 (Okla. Crim. App. 1975).
· cites it 6× “, § 815 that an order dismissing a criminal action must set forth in the order the reason for the dismissal and which must be entered on the minutes; and further that an oral statement by the judge that he would dismiss, and that he would have the clerk enter the order, did not…”
Wynn v. State, 879 A.2d 1097 (Md. 2005).
· cites it 2× “); Okla. Stat. tit. 22, § 815 (2003, 2005 Cum.”
McCarty v. State, 1999 OK CR 18 (Okla. Crim. App. 1998).
· cites it 2× “” Our reasoning was predicated on 22 O.S.1941, §§ 815 35 & 816. 36 Additionally, in Scribner v.”
State v. Echols, 793 P.2d 1066 (Alaska Ct. App. 1990).
· cites it 2× “40; Okla. Stat. tit. 22, § 815 ; Oregon Rev.Stat.”
State v. Sauve, 666 A.2d 1164 (Vt. 1995).
“40; Okla. Stat. tit. 22, § 815 ; Or. Rev. Stat.”
Ellis v. State, 2003 OK CR 18 (Okla. Crim. App. 2003).
“¶ 52 While the better procedure might have been for the District Attorney to have dismissed the case under 22 O.S.1991, § 815 and re-filed the case later when the gun was *1140 located, that was not required by the statute.”
Cook v. State, 650 P.2d 863 (Okla. Crim. App. 1982).
“When the grand jury indictments were dismissed on April 25,1977, no reasons were stated for the dismissal as required by 22 O.S.1971, § 815. The appellant concludes that this meant the original grand jury indictment was still in effect, therefore the district court did not have…”
Blades v. State, 619 P.2d 875 (Okla. Crim. App. 1980).
“2d 545 (1975), where we stated: “In conclusion, we observe that since the trial court dismissed the criminal proceedings as authorized by 22 O.S.1971, § 815, the State may reinstate the prosecution under the authority of 22 O.”
State v. Haws, 869 P.2d 849 (Okla. Crim. App. 1994).
“On April 14, 1992, the State filed a Motion to Dismiss and To Recall Warrant, pursuant to 22 O.S.1991, § 815, to be refiled according to State v.”
Gowler v. State, 589 P.2d 682 (Okla. Crim. App. 1978).
“Pursuant to 22 O.S.1971, § 815, the trial court on its own motion proceeded to order the cases of CRF-76-4641 and CRF-76-4640 to be dismissed.”
Bristow v. State, 644 P.2d 118 (Okla. Crim. App. 1982).
“The record here demonstrates that the order granting the State’s motion to dismiss because another case had been filed concerning the same crime complies with 22 O.S.1981, §§ 815 and 817. Compare Taylor v.”
State v. Edmondson, 536 P.2d 386 (Okla. Crim. App. 1975).
“Thereafter, on October 15, 1974, at a combined hearing- on the State’s Rule Six appeal, and on the defendant’s Motion to Quash, the State announced its -withdrawal of the Rule Six appeal, electing to proceed under the provisions of 22 O.S.1971, §§ 815, 817, and the case of…”
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.