(A) Except as otherwise provided in this division, whenever a court of common pleas, division of domestic relations, exercises the powers and jurisdictions conferred in Chapters 2151. and 2152. of the Revised Code, the judge or judges of that division or, if applicable, the judge of that division who specifically is designated by section 2301.03 of the Revised Code as being responsible for administering sections 2151.13, 2151.16, 2151.17, 2151.18, and 2152.71 of the Revised Code shall be the clerk of the court for all records filed with the court pursuant to Chapter 2151. or 2152. of the Revised Code or pursuant to any other section of the Revised Code that requires documents to be filed with a juvenile judge or a juvenile court. If, in a division of domestic relations of a court of common pleas that exercises the powers and jurisdiction conferred in Chapters 2151. and 2152. of the Revised Code, the judge of the division, both judges in a two-judge division, or a majority of the judges in a division with three or more judges and the clerk of the court of common pleas agree in an agreement that is signed by the agreeing judge or judges and the clerk and entered into formally in the journal of the court, the clerk of courts of common pleas shall keep the records filed with the court pursuant to Chapter 2151. or 2152. of the Revised Code or pursuant to any other section of the Revised Code that requires documents to be filed with a juvenile judge or a juvenile court.
Whenever the juvenile judge, or a majority of the juvenile judges of a multi-judge juvenile division, of a court of common pleas, juvenile division, and the clerk of the court of common pleas agree in an agreement that is signed by the judge and the clerk and entered formally in the journal of the court, the clerks of courts of common pleas shall keep the records of those courts. In all other cases, the juvenile judge shall be the clerk of the judge's own court.
(B) In counties in which the juvenile judge is clerk of the judge's own court, except as otherwise provided in section 3.061 of the Revised Code, before entering upon the duties of office as the clerk, the judge shall execute and file with the county treasurer a bond in a sum to be determined by the board of county commissioners, with sufficient surety to be approved by the board, conditioned for the faithful performance of duties as clerk. The bond shall be given for the benefit of the county, the state, or any person who may suffer loss by reason of a default in any of the conditions of the bond.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 34
cases (12 in the last 5 years), 1955–2026 · leading case: State v. Aalim (Slip Opinion), 2017-Ohio-2956, 150 Ohio 8.
State v. Aalim (Slip Opinion), 2017-Ohio-2956, 150 Ohio 8. · cites it 2דThe scope of this investigation is analogous to the investigation required under Ohio’s discretionary-transfer provision, R.C. 2151.12(C). {¶ 100} In sum, the Supreme Court’s decision in Kent exemplified its belief in the origins and purpose of the juvenile-justice system, which…”
State v. Smith (Slip Opinion), 2022-Ohio-274, 194 N.E.3d 297. · cites it 3ד104624, 2017-Ohio-5572 , in which the court stated: In this case, the juvenile court, prior to transferring Rosser pursuant to R.C. 2151.12(B) [sic, R.C. 2152.12(B), discretionary bindover], concluded that Rosser was over the age of 14 at the time of the offense, and there was…”
State v. Carter, 2017-Ohio-7501, 96 N.E.3d 1046. “See R.C. 2151.12 (A)(1)(a)(i). {¶ 3} After bindover, Appellant was indicted for aggravated murder and aggravated robbery; he was alternatively indicted for murder and felonious assault.”
In re A.J.S., 897 N.E.2d 629 (Ohio 2008). “R.C. 2152.12(B)(1) and (2). However, in a discretionary-bindover proceeding, the court must also determine whether the child is amenable to care or rehabilitation within the juvenile system and whether, in order to ensure the safety of the community, the child should be subject…”
In re D.M., 2017-Ohio-8768. · cites it 2ד{¶ 33} The statutory factors that favor discretionary transfer out of the juvenile system are set forth in R.C. 2151.12(D), which provides: (D) In considering whether to transfer a child under division (B) of this section, the juvenile court shall consider the following relevant…”
State v. Everhardt, 2018-Ohio-1252. · cites it 2ד{¶35} After reviewing the factors in R.C. 2151.12(D), the juvenile court analyzed the factors weighing against transfer in R.”
State v. Taylor, 2024-Ohio-5094. · cites it 5דThe juvenile court then discussed the requirements of R.C. 2151.12 and explained its weighing of the factors for and against transfer as follows: The whys I’m keeping it here, you know, you were 15 at the time of this offense.”
State v. D.T., 2024-Ohio-4482. · cites it 3ד’s suggestion on appeal, the juvenile court’s analysis under R.C. 2151.12 did not rely exclusively on the seriousness of the offenses or the harm caused to the victims.”
State v. Curtis, 2016-Ohio-6978. “The complaint also requested a permissive bindover to the general division of the common pleas court pursuant to R.C. 2151.12(B). Curtis denied the allegations.”
State v. Burns, 2022-Ohio-4606, 208 N.E.3d 801. “23: “[I]f the case is transferred for criminal prosecution pursuant to [R.C. 2152.”
State v. McCrary, 2014-Ohio-1468. · cites it 3דSee R.C. 2151.12(D)(1) (physical harm). The offense being evaluated was murder with a firearm.”
State v. Brown, 2014-Ohio-314. · cites it 2ד) Division (B) of R.C. 2151.12 requires a background investigation and an amenability hearing.”
State v. Smith (Slip Opinion), 2022-Ohio-274, 194 N.E.3d 297. “104624, 2017-Ohio-5572 , in which the court stated: In this case, the juvenile court, prior to transferring Rosser pursuant to R.C. 2151.12(B) [sic, R.C. 2152.12(B), discretionary bindover], concluded that Rosser was over the age of 14 at the time of the offense, and there was…”
State v. Curtis, 2016-Ohio-6978. “The complaint also requested a permissive bindover to the general division of the common pleas court pursuant to R.C. 2151.12(B). Curtis denied the allegations.”
State v. Taylor, 2024-Ohio-5094. “The juvenile court then discussed the requirements of R.C. 2151.12 and explained its weighing of the factors for and against transfer as follows: The whys I’m keeping it here, you know, you were 15 at the time of this offense.”
In re A.J.S., 897 N.E.2d 629 (Ohio 2008). “R.C. 2152.12(B)(1) and (2). However, in a discretionary-bindover proceeding, the court must also determine whether the child is amenable to care or rehabilitation within the juvenile system and whether, in order to ensure the safety of the community, the child should be subject…”
State v. Aalim (Slip Opinion), 2017-Ohio-2956, 150 Ohio 8. “The scope of this investigation is analogous to the investigation required under Ohio’s discretionary-transfer provision, R.C. 2151.12(C). {¶ 100} In sum, the Supreme Court’s decision in Kent exemplified its belief in the origins and purpose of the juvenile-justice system, which…”
In re D.M., 2017-Ohio-8768. “{¶ 33} The statutory factors that favor discretionary transfer out of the juvenile system are set forth in R.C. 2151.12(D), which provides: (D) In considering whether to transfer a child under division (B) of this section, the juvenile court shall consider the following relevant…”
State v. Everhardt, 2018-Ohio-1252. “{¶35} After reviewing the factors in R.C. 2151.12(D), the juvenile court analyzed the factors weighing against transfer in R.”
State v. D.T., 2024-Ohio-4482. “’s suggestion on appeal, the juvenile court’s analysis under R.C. 2151.12 did not rely exclusively on the seriousness of the offenses or the harm caused to the victims.”
State v. Taylor, 2024-Ohio-5094. “The juvenile court then discussed the requirements of R.C. 2151.12 and explained its weighing of the factors for and against transfer as follows: The whys I’m keeping it here, you know, you were 15 at the time of this offense.”
Ohio Rev. Code § 2151.12(D)(1): 2 cases
State v. Everhardt, 2018-Ohio-1252. “{¶35} After reviewing the factors in R.C. 2151.12(D), the juvenile court analyzed the factors weighing against transfer in R.”
State v. McCrary, 2014-Ohio-1468. “See R.C. 2151.12(D)(1) (physical harm). The offense being evaluated was murder with a firearm.”
Ohio Rev. Code § 2151.12(D)(5): 1 case
State v. McCrary, 2014-Ohio-1468. “See R.C. 2151.12(D)(1) (physical harm). The offense being evaluated was murder with a firearm.”
In re D.M., 2017-Ohio-8768. “{¶ 33} The statutory factors that favor discretionary transfer out of the juvenile system are set forth in R.C. 2151.12(D), which provides: (D) In considering whether to transfer a child under division (B) of this section, the juvenile court shall consider the following relevant…”
State v. Taylor, 2024-Ohio-5094. “The juvenile court then discussed the requirements of R.C. 2151.12 and explained its weighing of the factors for and against transfer as follows: The whys I’m keeping it here, you know, you were 15 at the time of this offense.”
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.