Prosecutors have declined to pursue a sexual assault charge against Cee Lo Green, but the singer and TV personality still faces a count of furnishing ecstasy to a woman.
"The Voice" star, whose given name is Thomas DeCarlo Callaway, pleaded not guilty to the charge in a Los Angeles courtroom, reports said.
The singer stood next to lawyer Blair Berk and said he understood he could be taken into custody if he failed to post $30,000 bail before the court closed.
I imagine he had that much change bouncing around his sofa cushions.
Green agreed to be booked by Los Angeles Police within 24 hours and waited in the courthouse gallery with a woman described as his girlfriend, while his bail bondsman took care of the paperwork.
Berk called the sexual assault allegation "false and unfounded" in a statement, according to CNN.
Green is due back in court on Nov. 20 for a preliminary hearing.
"Mr. Green encouraged a full and complete investigation of those claims and he was confident once conducted he would be cleared of having any wrongful intent and it would be established that any relations were consensual," Berk said. "As it relates to the one charge of furnishing or sharing ecstasy, Mr. Green will responsibly address that matter in a court of law but not comment on it further out of respect for the process."
Prosecutors say the 38-year-old Green slipped ecstasy to a 33-year-old woman while the two were dining at a downtown Los Angeles restaurant in July 2012 and then returned to her hotel room with her.
The unidentified woman supposedly recorded Green talking about the incident during a later conversation, a law enforcement source reportedly told the New York Daily News.
The alleged victim said she believed Green spiked her drink and that the "next thing" she remembered was waking up naked in a bedroom with him.
"It is clear from the evidence that the suspect administered a controlled substance to wit ecstasy to the victim," prosecutors said in court documents explaining why they were not pressing the sexual assault charge. "What is less clear is the actual condition of the victim at the time of sexual intercourse. There is insufficient evidence to prove that the level of the victim's intoxication deprived the victim of the capacity to give consent. Second, there is insufficient evidence to prove that the defendant knew or should have known that the victim lacked the capacity to have sex with him as required by law."