Ohio Rev. Code » Chapter 1531
Ohio Revised Code

Ohio Rev. Code § 1531.99 (2026)

Penalty

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ORCcodes.ohio.gov (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

(A) Whoever violates section 1531.02 of the Revised Code, or any division rule, other than a rule adopted under section 1531.25 of the Revised Code, is guilty of a misdemeanor of the fourth degree.

(B) Whoever violates section 1531.02 of the Revised Code concerning the taking or possession of deer or violates division (K) of section 1531.06 or section 1531.07 or 1531.29 of the Revised Code is guilty of a misdemeanor of the third degree on a first offense; on each subsequent offense, that person is guilty of a misdemeanor of the first degree.

(C) Whoever violates section 1531.25 of the Revised Code is guilty of a misdemeanor of the first degree.

(D) Whoever violates section 1531.02 of the Revised Code concerning the buying, selling, or offering for sale of any wild animals or parts of wild animals, the minimum value of which animals or parts, in the aggregate, is one thousand dollars or more as established under section 1531.201 of the Revised Code, is guilty of a felony of the fifth degree.

(E) A court that imposes sentence for a violation of any section of this chapter governing the holding, taking, buying, selling, or possession of wild animals, including, without limitation, section 1531.11 of the Revised Code, may require the person who is convicted of or pleads guilty to the offense, in addition to any fine, term of imprisonment, seizure, and forfeiture imposed, to make restitution for the minimum value of the wild animal illegally held, taken, bought, sold, or possessed as established under section 1531.201 of the Revised Code. An officer who collects moneys paid as restitution under this section shall pay those moneys to the treasurer of state who shall deposit them in the state treasury to the credit of the wildlife fund established under section 1531.17 of the Revised Code.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 6 cases, 1997–2017 · leading case: Risner v. Ohio Dept. of Nat. Resources, Ohio Div. of Wildlife (Slip Opinion), 2015 Ohio 3731 (Ohio 2015).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Risner v. Ohio Dept. of Nat. Resources, Ohio Div. of Wildlife (Slip Opinion), 2015 Ohio 3731 (Ohio 2015). · cites it 2× “R.C. 1531.99(E) is nearly identical. And here, the sentencing court had already ordered restitution and the forfeiture of the animal in the criminal proceeding.”
State v. Musick, 695 N.E.2d 317 (Ohio Ct. App. 1997). “It is a fourth-degree misdemeanor, per R.C. 1531.99, punishable by a maximum of thirty days in jail, a fine of $250, loss of hunting privileges up to three years, or any combination of the three.”
State v. Chambers, 903 N.E.2d 709 (Ohio Ct. App. 2008). “) {¶ 18} R.C. 1531.99 establishes the penalty for violating R.”
State v. Storms, 2017 Ohio 8658 (Ohio Ct. App. 2017). “) {¶ 8} Appellant argues that R.C. 1531.99 should control. Under R.C. 1533.”
State v. Gasparac, 2017 Ohio 8711 (Ohio Ct. App. 2017). “R.C. 1531.99(D): Whoever violates section 1531.”
State v. Pierce, 2014 Ohio 4833 (Ohio Ct. App. 2014). “13CA11 6 permanently tag deer, in violation of former OAC 1501:31-15-11(F)(14), both third degree misdemeanors per R.C. 1531.99(B), which governs penalties and restitution for illegally taken or possessed wild animals.”
Ohio Rev. Code § 1531.99(B): 1 case
State v. Pierce, 2014 Ohio 4833 (Ohio Ct. App. 2014). “13CA11 6 permanently tag deer, in violation of former OAC 1501:31-15-11(F)(14), both third degree misdemeanors per R.C. 1531.99(B), which governs penalties and restitution for illegally taken or possessed wild animals.”
Ohio Rev. Code § 1531.99(D): 1 case
State v. Gasparac, 2017 Ohio 8711 (Ohio Ct. App. 2017). “R.C. 1531.99(D): Whoever violates section 1531.”
Ohio Rev. Code § 1531.99(E): 1 case
Risner v. Ohio Dept. of Nat. Resources, Ohio Div. of Wildlife (Slip Opinion), 2015 Ohio 3731 (Ohio 2015). “R.C. 1531.99(E) is nearly identical. And here, the sentencing court had already ordered restitution and the forfeiture of the animal in the criminal proceeding.”
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.