Ohio Rev. Code » Chapter 2901
Ohio Revised Code

Ohio Rev. Code § 2901.05 (2026)

Burden of proof - reasonable doubt - self-defense

✓ laws through the 2026 session (checked Sept. 2026)
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ORCcodes.ohio.gov (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
Effective:
April 6, 2021
Latest Legislation:
Senate Bill 175 - 133rd General Assembly
PDF:
Download Authenticated PDF
 

(A) Every person accused of an offense is presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, and the burden of proof for all elements of the offense is upon the prosecution. The burden of going forward with the evidence of an affirmative defense, and the burden of proof, by a preponderance of the evidence, for an affirmative defense other than self-defense, defense of another, or defense of the accused's residence presented as described in division (B)(1) of this section, is upon the accused.

(B)(1) A person is allowed to act in self-defense, defense of another, or defense of that person's residence. If, at the trial of a person who is accused of an offense that involved the person's use of force against another, there is evidence presented that tends to support that the accused person used the force in self-defense, defense of another, or defense of that person's residence, the prosecution must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused person did not use the force in self-defense, defense of another, or defense of that person's residence, as the case may be.

(2) Subject to division (B)(3) of this section, a person is presumed to have acted in self-defense or defense of another when using defensive force that is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm to another if the person against whom the defensive force is used is in the process of unlawfully and without privilege to do so entering, or has unlawfully and without privilege to do so entered, the residence or vehicle occupied by the person using the defensive force.

(3) The presumption set forth in division (B)(2) of this section does not apply if either of the following is true:

(a) The person against whom the defensive force is used has a right to be in, or is a lawful resident of, the residence or vehicle.

(b) The person who uses the defensive force uses it while in a residence or vehicle and the person is unlawfully, and without privilege to be, in that residence or vehicle.

(4) The presumption set forth in division (B)(2) of this section is a rebuttable presumption and may be rebutted by a preponderance of the evidence, provided that the prosecution's burden of proof remains proof beyond a reasonable doubt as described in divisions (A) and (B)(1) of this section.

(C) As part of its charge to the jury in a criminal case, the court shall read the definitions of "reasonable doubt" and "proof beyond a reasonable doubt," contained in division (E) of this section.

(D) As used in this section:

(1) An "affirmative defense" is either of the following:

(a) A defense expressly designated as affirmative;

(b) A defense involving an excuse or justification peculiarly within the knowledge of the accused, on which the accused can fairly be required to adduce supporting evidence.

(2) "Dwelling" means a building or conveyance of any kind that has a roof over it and that is designed to be occupied by people lodging in the building or conveyance at night, regardless of whether the building or conveyance is temporary or permanent or is mobile or immobile. As used in this division, a building or conveyance includes, but is not limited to, an attached porch, and a building or conveyance with a roof over it includes, but is not limited to, a tent.

(3) "Residence" means a dwelling in which a person resides either temporarily or permanently or is visiting as a guest.

(4) "Vehicle" means a conveyance of any kind, whether or not motorized, that is designed to transport people or property.

(E) "Reasonable doubt" is present when the jurors, after they have carefully considered and compared all the evidence, cannot say they are firmly convinced of the truth of the charge. It is a doubt based on reason and common sense. Reasonable doubt is not mere possible doubt, because everything relating to human affairs or depending on moral evidence is open to some possible or imaginary doubt. "Proof beyond a reasonable doubt" is proof of such character that an ordinary person would be willing to rely and act upon it in the most important of the person's own affairs.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 1,111 cases (487 in the last 5 years), 1954–2026 · leading case: State v. Ireland (Slip Opinion), 2018-Ohio-4494, 121 N.E.3d 285.
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Ireland (Slip Opinion), 2018-Ohio-4494, 121 N.E.3d 285. · cites it 48× “{¶ 13} Ireland, however, did not assert “automatism” as a defense at the trial level, and the term does not appear in R.C. 2901.05 or in the jury instruction provided by the trial court.”
State v. Messenger, 2022-Ohio-4562, 216 N.E.3d 653. · cites it 19× “] Criminal law—R.C. 2901.05—Affirmative defenses—Self-defense—Burden of production and burden of persuasion—Defendant has burden of production regarding self-defense claim and must produce legally sufficient evidence that defendant’s use of force was in self-defense—State then…”
State v. Estelle, 2021-Ohio-2636, 176 N.E.3d 380. · cites it 39× “3 R.C. 2901.05 was amended subsequent to Estelle’s trial.”
State v. Messenger, 2021-Ohio-2044, 174 N.E.3d 425. · cites it 17× “Effective March 28, 2019, however, following revisions to R.C. 2901.05, a defendant no longer bears the burden of establishing the elements of self-defense by a preponderance of the evidence.”
State v. Bundy, 2012-Ohio-3934. · cites it 32× “2d 512, ¶7 , quoting R.C. 2901.05(A). {¶ 38} To establish self-defense, the defendant bears the burden to prove, by a preponderance of the evidence, that “‘(1) the defendant was not at fault in creating the violent situation, (2) the defendant had a bona fide belief that she was…”
Engle v. Isaac, 456 U.S. 107 (1982). · cites it 10× “" Ohio Rev. Code Ann. § 2901.05 (A) (1975).”
State v. Hurt, 2022-Ohio-2039. · cites it 23× “at ¶ 57 (trial court did not err in instructing the jury on former version of R.C. 2901.05 because the new version became effective while the defendant’s case was pending and the General Assembly did not indicate that it intended the amended statute to apply retroactively).”
State v. Adkins, 2020-Ohio-6799. · cites it 28× “3 Subsequent to the indictment in this case, R.C. 2901.05 was amended to require the “the prosecution [to] prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused person did not use the force in self-defense, defense of another, or defense of that person’s residence, as the case may be.”
State v. Petway, 2020-Ohio-3848, 156 N.E.3d 467. · cites it 12× “Petway filed a timely notice of appeal of this entry and presents the following sole assignment of error for our review: {¶34} “The trial court committed prejudicial error in denying Petway’s request for a jury instruction on self-defense based on its opinion that Petway had not…”
State v. Parrish, 2020-Ohio-4807. · cites it 19× “{¶7} R.C. 2901.05 was again modified in late 2018 to change the treatment for the use of force in self-defense, defense of another, and defense of residence.”
State v. Shine-Johnson, 2018-Ohio-3347, 117 N.E.3d 986. · cites it 13× “02(A); R.C. 2901.05. Self-defense is an affirmative defense which the accused has the burden to prove by a preponderance of the evidence.”
State v. Palmer, 2024-Ohio-539, 238 N.E.3d 33. · cites it 16× “] Criminal law—R.C. 2901.05—Self-defense jury instruction—Appellant entitled to self-defense jury instruction because he met his burden of production by presenting legally sufficient evidence for each element of defense—Court of appeals’ judgment reversed, and cause remanded to…”
Show all 1,111 citing cases →
Ohio Rev. Code § 2901.05(A): 380 cases
State v. Messenger, 2022-Ohio-4562, 216 N.E.3d 653. “] Criminal law—R.C. 2901.05—Affirmative defenses—Self-defense—Burden of production and burden of persuasion—Defendant has burden of production regarding self-defense claim and must produce legally sufficient evidence that defendant’s use of force was in self-defense—State then…”
State v. Shine-Johnson, 2018-Ohio-3347, 117 N.E.3d 986. “02(A); R.C. 2901.05. Self-defense is an affirmative defense which the accused has the burden to prove by a preponderance of the evidence.”
State v. Rhodes, 590 N.E.2d 261 (Ohio 1992).
State v. Estelle, 2021-Ohio-2636, 176 N.E.3d 380. “3 R.C. 2901.05 was amended subsequent to Estelle’s trial.”
State v. Petway, 2020-Ohio-3848, 156 N.E.3d 467. “Petway filed a timely notice of appeal of this entry and presents the following sole assignment of error for our review: {¶34} “The trial court committed prejudicial error in denying Petway’s request for a jury instruction on self-defense based on its opinion that Petway had not…”
Ohio Rev. Code § 2901.05(A)(1): 2 cases
State v. Carswell, 2021-Ohio-3379.
State v. Mobley, 2011-Ohio-309.
Ohio Rev. Code § 2901.05(A)(4): 2 cases
Lawrence v. Warden, Marion Corr. Inst., No. 1:22-cv-00359 (S.D. Ohio Aug. 23, 2023).
State v. Cantrell, 2026-Ohio-1675.
Ohio Rev. Code § 2901.05(A)(5)(d): 1 case
State v. Crossty, 2017-Ohio-8382, 99 N.E.3d 1048.
Ohio Rev. Code § 2901.05(B): 76 cases
State v. Bundy, 2012-Ohio-3934. “2d 512, ¶7 , quoting R.C. 2901.05(A). {¶ 38} To establish self-defense, the defendant bears the burden to prove, by a preponderance of the evidence, that “‘(1) the defendant was not at fault in creating the violent situation, (2) the defendant had a bona fide belief that she was…”
State v. Kean, 2019-Ohio-1171.
State v. Hadley, 2013-Ohio-1942.
State v. Lipkins, 2017-Ohio-4085, 92 N.E.3d 82.
State v. Williams, 2020-Ohio-3269.
Ohio Rev. Code § 2901.05(B)(1): 347 cases
State v. Messenger, 2022-Ohio-4562, 216 N.E.3d 653. “] Criminal law—R.C. 2901.05—Affirmative defenses—Self-defense—Burden of production and burden of persuasion—Defendant has burden of production regarding self-defense claim and must produce legally sufficient evidence that defendant’s use of force was in self-defense—State then…”
State v. Messenger, 2021-Ohio-2044, 174 N.E.3d 425. “Effective March 28, 2019, however, following revisions to R.C. 2901.05, a defendant no longer bears the burden of establishing the elements of self-defense by a preponderance of the evidence.”
State v. Petway, 2020-Ohio-3848, 156 N.E.3d 467. “Petway filed a timely notice of appeal of this entry and presents the following sole assignment of error for our review: {¶34} “The trial court committed prejudicial error in denying Petway’s request for a jury instruction on self-defense based on its opinion that Petway had not…”
State v. Kean, 2019-Ohio-1171.
State v. Parrish, 2020-Ohio-4807. “{¶7} R.C. 2901.05 was again modified in late 2018 to change the treatment for the use of force in self-defense, defense of another, and defense of residence.”
Ohio Rev. Code § 2901.05(B)(1)(b): 1 case
State v. Hinton, 2014-Ohio-490.
Ohio Rev. Code § 2901.05(B)(2): 41 cases
State v. Estelle, 2021-Ohio-2636, 176 N.E.3d 380. “3 R.C. 2901.05 was amended subsequent to Estelle’s trial.”
State v. Bundy, 2012-Ohio-3934. “2d 512, ¶7 , quoting R.C. 2901.05(A). {¶ 38} To establish self-defense, the defendant bears the burden to prove, by a preponderance of the evidence, that “‘(1) the defendant was not at fault in creating the violent situation, (2) the defendant had a bona fide belief that she was…”
State v. Jones, 2022-Ohio-3162, 195 N.E.3d 561.
State v. Chavez, 2020-Ohio-426.
State v. Cunningham, 2025-Ohio-347.
Ohio Rev. Code § 2901.05(B)(2)(a): 12 cases
State v. Bundy, 2012-Ohio-3934. “2d 512, ¶7 , quoting R.C. 2901.05(A). {¶ 38} To establish self-defense, the defendant bears the burden to prove, by a preponderance of the evidence, that “‘(1) the defendant was not at fault in creating the violent situation, (2) the defendant had a bona fide belief that she was…”
State v. Hadley, 2013-Ohio-1942.
State v. Chandler, 2017-Ohio-8573, 99 N.E.3d 1255.
State v. Echevarria, 2018-Ohio-1193.
State v. Stephens, 2016-Ohio-384, 59 N.E.3d 612.
Ohio Rev. Code § 2901.05(B)(2)(b): 3 cases
State v. Bond, 2016-Ohio-8383.
State v. Hadley, 2013-Ohio-1942.
State v. Price, 2025-Ohio-2218.
Ohio Rev. Code § 2901.05(B)(3): 14 cases
State v. Bundy, 2012-Ohio-3934. “2d 512, ¶7 , quoting R.C. 2901.05(A). {¶ 38} To establish self-defense, the defendant bears the burden to prove, by a preponderance of the evidence, that “‘(1) the defendant was not at fault in creating the violent situation, (2) the defendant had a bona fide belief that she was…”
State v. Kean, 2019-Ohio-1171.
State v. Hadley, 2013-Ohio-1942.
State v. Chavez, 2020-Ohio-426.
State v. Petrone, 2012-Ohio-911.
Ohio Rev. Code § 2901.05(B)(3)(a): 2 cases
State v. Montgomery, 2015-Ohio-4652.
State v. Coates, 2025-Ohio-5340.
Ohio Rev. Code § 2901.05(B)(4): 6 cases
State v. McDonald, 2023-Ohio-1987.
State v. Bender, 2024-Ohio-1750, 243 N.E.3d 713.
State v. Jones, 2022-Ohio-3162, 195 N.E.3d 561.
State v. Ellis, 2021-Ohio-1297.
State v. Ballein, 2022-Ohio-2331.
Ohio Rev. Code § 2901.05(B)(l): 1 case
State v. Sharrer, 2025-Ohio-1114.
Ohio Rev. Code § 2901.05(C): 18 cases
State v. Rhodes, 590 N.E.2d 261 (Ohio 1992).
Austin v. Wilkinson, 189 F. Supp. 2d 719 (N.D. Ohio 2002).
State v. Estelle, 2021-Ohio-2636, 176 N.E.3d 380. “3 R.C. 2901.05 was amended subsequent to Estelle’s trial.”
State v. Young, 525 N.E.2d 1363 (Ohio 1988).
State v. Doran, 449 N.E.2d 1295 (Ohio 1983).
Ohio Rev. Code § 2901.05(C)(2): 28 cases
State v. Doran, 449 N.E.2d 1295 (Ohio 1983).
State v. Nucklos, 869 N.E.2d 674 (Ohio Ct. App. 2d Dist. 2007).
State v. Cooper, 867 N.E.2d 493 (Ohio Ct. App. 4th Dist. 2007).
State v. Rhodes, 590 N.E.2d 261 (Ohio 1992).
State v. Young, 525 N.E.2d 1363 (Ohio 1988).
Ohio Rev. Code § 2901.05(D): 104 cases
State v. Van Gundy, 594 N.E.2d 604 (Ohio 1992).
State v. Leonard, 818 N.E.2d 229 (Ohio 2004).
State v. Hoffner, 811 N.E.2d 48 (Ohio 2004).
State v. Jones, 744 N.E.2d 1163 (Ohio 2001).
State v. Frazier, 652 N.E.2d 1000 (Ohio 1995).
Ohio Rev. Code § 2901.05(D)(1): 13 cases
State v. Ireland (Slip Opinion), 2018-Ohio-4494, 121 N.E.3d 285. “{¶ 13} Ireland, however, did not assert “automatism” as a defense at the trial level, and the term does not appear in R.C. 2901.05 or in the jury instruction provided by the trial court.”
Scott v. Anderson, 58 F. Supp. 2d 767 (N.D. Ohio 1998).
State v. Nucklos, 904 N.E.2d 512 (Ohio 2009).
State v. Dunham, 2014-Ohio-1042.
State v. Ellis, 2011-Ohio-2967.
Ohio Rev. Code § 2901.05(D)(1)(a): 8 cases
State v. Ireland (Slip Opinion), 2018-Ohio-4494, 121 N.E.3d 285. “{¶ 13} Ireland, however, did not assert “automatism” as a defense at the trial level, and the term does not appear in R.C. 2901.05 or in the jury instruction provided by the trial court.”
State v. Faggs (Slip Opinion), 2020-Ohio-523, 151 N.E.3d 593.
State v. Rogers, 2013-Ohio-3235.
State v. Nucklos, 904 N.E.2d 512 (Ohio 2009).
State v. Ireland, 2017-Ohio-263, 111 N.E.3d 468.
Ohio Rev. Code § 2901.05(D)(1)(b): 18 cases
State v. Ireland (Slip Opinion), 2018-Ohio-4494, 121 N.E.3d 285. “{¶ 13} Ireland, however, did not assert “automatism” as a defense at the trial level, and the term does not appear in R.C. 2901.05 or in the jury instruction provided by the trial court.”
State v. Faggs (Slip Opinion), 2020-Ohio-523, 151 N.E.3d 593.
State v. Nucklos, 904 N.E.2d 512 (Ohio 2009).
State v. Middleton, 2020-Ohio-1308.
State v. Ireland, 2017-Ohio-263, 111 N.E.3d 468.
Ohio Rev. Code § 2901.05(D)(2): 20 cases
State v. Moore, 2020-Ohio-4321, 158 N.E.3d 111.
State v. Estelle, 2021-Ohio-2636, 176 N.E.3d 380. “3 R.C. 2901.05 was amended subsequent to Estelle’s trial.”
State v. Shine-Johnson, 2018-Ohio-3347, 117 N.E.3d 986. “02(A); R.C. 2901.05. Self-defense is an affirmative defense which the accused has the burden to prove by a preponderance of the evidence.”
State v. Hodgson, 2021-Ohio-4374, 182 N.E.3d 417.
State v. Angel, 2021-Ohio-4322.
Ohio Rev. Code § 2901.05(D)(3): 18 cases
State v. Moore, 2020-Ohio-4321, 158 N.E.3d 111.
State v. Lipkins, 2017-Ohio-4085, 92 N.E.3d 82.
State v. Brown, 2017-Ohio-7424, 96 N.E.3d 1128.
State v. Estelle, 2021-Ohio-2636, 176 N.E.3d 380. “3 R.C. 2901.05 was amended subsequent to Estelle’s trial.”
State v. Waller, 2014-Ohio-237.
Ohio Rev. Code § 2901.05(E): 80 cases
State v. Kirkland (Slip Opinion), 2014-Ohio-1966, 15 N.E.3d 818.
State v. Knuff, 2024-Ohio-902, 239 N.E.3d 259.
State v. Worley (Slip Opinion), 2021-Ohio-2207, 174 N.E.3d 754.
State v. Hundley (Slip Opinion), 2020-Ohio-3775, 166 N.E.3d 1066.
State v. Renner, 2013-Ohio-5463.
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.