Apparently, Ohio is one of 21 states that grant the right to request a jury trial solely and exclusively to the defendant. The other jurisdictions to include the federal government give prosecutors some say in the process. For example, Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 23 states that a defendant may only waive a trial by jury with the consent of the prosecution. This provision has been upheld by the Supreme Court in Patton v. U.S. and Singer v. U.S.
Recently, Ohio State Rep. Lynn Slaby, a former prosecutor, introduced HB 265. If enacted into law, this bill will allow prosecutors to request a jury trial in any case where the defendant has a similar right. HB 265 proponents, of which there are few outside of the prosecutor's office, like to point to the federal system as the reason why Ohio should change its laws. One might argue that this rule is necessary on the federal level because federal judges have lifetime tenure. Thus, if you are a prosecutor with a case involving a gun charge and you don't like how a particular judge deals with gun cases, you might want the option of going to the jury. However, that argument doesn't work as well in a state like Ohio where judges do not have lifetime tenure and regularly face reelection.