State v. Bales, 2012 Ohio 4426

Lorain County created a Pretrial Diversion Program for felonies on April 12, 2010, with defined eligibility and dismissal upon successful completion.
Eligibility requirements included age, no prior felonies, no pattern of criminal behavior, voluntary consent, compliance with Diversion Unit conditions, not excluded by statute, and no >$5,000 restitution owed.
Todd M. Bales was indicted for felonious assault and sought acceptance into the court’s Diversion Program prior to trial.
The State objected, arguing the program was unlawfully created without prosecutor participation and that Bales should proceed to prosecution.
The trial court approved Bales’ entry into the Diversion Program over the State’s objection; Bales pleaded guilty and agreed to complete the program within one year (or longer by court order).
After completion, the trial court sua sponte dismissed the case with prejudice; the State appealed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether dismissal with prejudice was proper after Diversion completion	Bales’ dismissal violates Crim.R. 48(B) and statutory rights	Diversion completion justifies dismissal under program terms	First assignment sustained; dismissal with prejudice deemed an abuse of discretion
Whether the Diversion Program violates separation of powers or is limited to prosecutors	Program unlawfully removes party and infringes executive/legislative balance	Program is properly established by court and aligns with statutory authority	Court did not reach constitutional questions; not essential to disposition

In re S.J., 106 Ohio St.3d 11 (2005-Ohio-3215) (jurisdiction to appeal under R.C. 2945.67(A) discussed)
State v. Ryan, 17 Ohio App.3d 150 (1984) (appeal as of right when dismissal affects substantial rights)
State v. Dixon, 14 Ohio App.3d 396 (1984) (abuse of Crim.R. 48(B) dismissal without rights violations)
State v. Grundy, 2006-Ohio-521 (9th Dist.) (limitations on dismissals with prejudice; need for findings)