Virginia Code
Va. Code Ann. § 19.2-265.3 (2026)
Nolle prosequi; discretion of court upon good cause shown
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
VA-LISlaw.lis.virginia.gov
JustiaTitle on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
Nolle prosequi shall be entered only in the discretion of the court, upon motion of the Commonwealth with good cause therefor shown.
1979, c. 641.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 40
cases (9 in the last 5 years), 1981–2026 · leading case: Wright v. Commonwealth, 667 S.E.2d 787 (Va. Ct. App. 2008).
Wright v. Commonwealth, 667 S.E.2d 787 (Va. Ct. App. 2008). “Therefore, Wright concluded, the grant of the motion was improper because there was no *791 "good cause" as required by Code § 19.2-265.3. The defense further argued that the district court's grant of the Commonwealth's motion deprived Wright of her statutory right to a…”
Roe v. Com., 628 S.E.2d 526 (Va. 2006). “The defendant also asserted that the Commonwealth chose not to request a nolle prosequi pursuant to Code § 19.2-265.3, but instead the Commonwealth specifically moved to dismiss the charges.”
Wright v. Commonwealth, 659 S.E.2d 583 (Va. Ct. App. 2008). “We hold that Code § 19.2-265.3 requires the Commonwealth to provide a reason for seeking a nolle prosequi before such motion may be granted.”
Roe v. Commonwealth, 609 S.E.2d 635 (Va. Ct. App. 2005). “Code § 19.2-265.3. He contends that, if the court enters an order to dismiss the charges without indicating whether it is with or without prejudice, the Commonwealth is barred from subsequent reindictment on the same offenses.”
Moore v. Commonwealth, 722 S.E.2d 668 (Va. Ct. App. 2012). “On appeal, Moore contends that, because the prosecutor offered no reason, and because it made no finding that "good cause" existed to do so, the trial court erred by granting the Commonwealth's motion to nolle prosequi the single issuing multiple worthless checks charge and…”
Duggins v. Commonwealth, 722 S.E.2d 663 (Va. Ct. App. 2012). “In 1979, the General Assembly codified this tradition in Code § 19.2-265.3. See 1979 Va. Acts ch. 641.”
Harris v. Commonwealth, 520 S.E.2d 825 (Va. 1999). “In a supporting memorandum, Harris contended that the Commonwealth lacked good cause for seeking the nolle prosequi of the original indictment as required by Code § 19.2-265.3. Relying on Battle v. Commonwealth, 12 Va.”
Cantrell v. Commonwealth, 373 S.E.2d 328 (Va. Ct. App. 1988). “Code § 19.2-265.3. “Under Virginia procedure a nolle prosequi is a discontinuance which discharges the accused from liability on the indictment to which the nolle prosequi is entered.”
Boggs v. Commonwealth, 331 S.E.2d 407 (Va. 1985). “” He claims that the ruling was prejudicial because he was forced “to proceed before a jury that was not cognizant of its option to consider the evidence within the framework of a first degree murder alternative.” The “framework” in which the evidence was adduced was constructed…”
Arnold v. Commonwealth, 443 S.E.2d 183 (Va. Ct. App. 1994). “Although Code § 19.2-265.3 grants the trial judge discretionary authority to enter a nolle prosequi, the statute requires a showing of “good cause.”
Dezfuli v. Commonwealth, 707 S.E.2d 1 (Va. Ct. App. 2011). “Code § 19.2-265.3 provides that a “Nolle prosequi shall be entered only in the discretion of the court, upon motion of the Commonwealth with good cause therefor shown.”
Kenyon v. Commonwealth, 561 S.E.2d 17 (Va. Ct. App. 2002). “1999) (quoting 22A C.J.S. Criminal Law § 419, at 1 (1989)). Under Virginia law, a nolle prosequi “shall be entered only in the discretion of the court, upon motion of the Commonwealth with good cause therefor shown.”
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.