All persons are competent witnesses except those of unsound mind and children under ten years of age who appear incapable of receiving just impressions of the facts and transactions respecting which they are examined, or of relating them truly.
In a hearing in an abuse, neglect, or dependency case, any examination made by the court to determine whether a child is a competent witness shall be conducted by the court in an office or room other than a courtroom or hearing room, shall be conducted in the presence of only those individuals considered necessary by the court for the conduct of the examination or the well-being of the child, and shall be conducted with a court reporter present. The court may allow the prosecutor, guardian ad litem, or attorney for any party to submit questions for use by the court in determining whether the child is a competent witness.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 87
cases (22 in the last 5 years), 1955–2026 · leading case: Kentucky v. Stincer, 482 U.S. 730 (1987).
Kentucky v. Stincer, 482 U.S. 730 (1987). · cites it 2ד20 (McKinney 1981); Ohio Rev. Code Ann. § 2317.01 (1981); see Protecting Child Victim/Witnesses, at 45 (listing statutes).”
State v. Cobb, 610 N.E.2d 1009 (Ohio Ct. App. 9th Dist. 1991). · cites it 4דI “The trial court erred in finding the victim, Eddie * * *, a child of tender years competent to testify for the reason it failed to conduct a proper examination of the child and refused to hear a tape recording of the victim’s statement when he originally made his complaint…”
State v. Pyle, 2018-Ohio-3160. · cites it 3דPyle cites to R.C. 2317.01, which discusses the competency of a child under the age of ten as a witness and sets forth requirements for conducting a hearing to determine whether such child is a competent witness.”
State v. Clark, 644 N.E.2d 331 (Ohio 1994). · cites it 2ד601, involved the application of R.C. 2317.01, which stated: "All persons are competent witnesses except those of unsound mind, and children under ten years of age who appear incapable of receiving just impressions of the facts and transactions respecting which they are…”
State v. Kinney, 519 N.E.2d 1386 (Ohio Ct. App. 1st Dist. 1987). · cites it 3דUnder Ohio law, every person is competent to be a witness except those of unsound mind and children under ten years of age who appear incapable of receiving just impressions of the facts and transactions respecting which they are examined, or of relating them truly.”
State v. Boston, 545 N.E.2d 1220 (Ohio 1989). “601 and R.C. 2317.01. 2 Several states have already taken some action in this regard.”
Heath v. Heath, 2017-Ohio-5506. · cites it 2ד601(A) and R.C. 2317.01. Both provisions generally provide that every person is competent to be a witness except children under the age of ten.”
State v. Eastham, 530 N.E.2d 409 (Ohio 1988). “601(A) and R.C. 2317.01 state that “children under ten years of age, who appear incapable of receiving just impressions of the facts and transactions respecting which they are examined, or of relating them truly,” are not competent to be witnesses.”
State v. Freeze, 2012-Ohio-5840. “601(A) and R.C. 2317.01, "all persons are competent witnesses except those of unsound mind and children under ten years of age who appear incapable of receiving just impressions of the facts and transactions respecting which they - 16 - Butler CA2011-11-209 are examined, or of…”
In re Est. of Shaffer (Slip Opinion), 2020-Ohio-6973, 159 N.E.3d 1190. · cites it 3דChapter 2107, but the general definition of “competency” is found in R.C. 2317.01: All persons are competent witnesses except those of unsound mind and children under ten years of age who appear incapable of receiving just impressions of the facts and transactions respecting…”
State v. Ridley, 2020-Ohio-2779, 154 N.E.3d 462. · cites it 2ד” R.C. 2317.01. The version of R.C. 2317.01 in effect at the time of Ridley’s trial employed identical language.”
In re L.L.S., 2017-Ohio-7450. “See R.C. 2317.01 (“All persons are competent witnesses except those of unsound mind and children under ten years of age who appear incapable of receiving just impressions of the facts and transactions respecting which they are examined, or of relating them truly.”
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.