Legal Opinion

In Re Golib

Ohio Court of Appeals

Decided January 20, 1955No. 5222PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Per curiam

This is an action in habeas corpus, originating in this court. The facts have been stipulated.

The petitioner was indicted for forgery by the G-rand Jury of Franklin County. On February 2, 1954, after arraignment and the entering of a plea of not guilty, an order was made as follows:

“This day upon application of the prosecuting attorney and for good cause shown, it is ordered by the court that nolle prosequi be entered in this indictment.”

Upon the face of the record, it appears that this order was legally and properly entered under the provisions of Section 2941.33, Revised Code, which read as…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. The People v. WatsonIllinois Supreme Court · 1946
  2. Commonwealth v. McLaughlinSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1928
  3. Woodworth v. MillsWisconsin Supreme Court · 1884
  4. Price v. CobbCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1939
  5. State v. Van NessSupreme Court of Vermont · 1938

8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Klopfer v. North CarolinaSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
  2. State Ex Rel. Flynt v. DinkelackerOhio Court of Appeals · 2004
  3. City of Columbus v. StiresOhio Court of Appeals · 1967
  4. Sander v. State of OhioDistrict Court, S.D. Ohio · 1973
  5. State v. RosenNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1958

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API