Ohio Revised Code

Ohio Rev. Code § 2903.10 (2026)

Functionally impaired person, caretaker defined

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

As used in sections 2903.13 and 2903.16 of the Revised Code:

(A) "Person with a functional impairment" means any person who has a physical or mental impairment that prevents the person from providing for the person's own care or protection or whose infirmities caused by aging prevent the person from providing for the person's own care or protection.

(B) "Caretaker" means a person who assumes the duty to provide for the care and protection of a person with a functional impairment on a voluntary basis, by contract, through receipt of payment for care and protection, as a result of a family relationship, or by order of a court of competent jurisdiction. "Caretaker" does not include a person who owns, operates, or administers, or who is an agent or employee of, a care facility, as defined in section 2903.33 of the Revised Code.

Last updated March 10, 2023 at 11:14 AM

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3 cases, 1957–2014 · leading case: State v. Cox, 2014-Ohio-2201, 12 N.E.3d 466.
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Cox, 2014-Ohio-2201, 12 N.E.3d 466. · cites it 3× “In support of both motions, she argued that the State had failed to prove that she was in the relationship of caretaker, as defined in R.C. 2903.10(B), to K.W. at the time of the alleged offense.”
Cincinnati (City) v. Walton, 145 N.E.2d 407 (Ohio Ct. App. 1957). “” When this court served in the Ohio Legislature in 1955 he coauthored legislation which became §2903.10 R. C. placing severe penalties on sales to children under eighteen of magazines depicting seduction or incest or which were provocative of corrupt morals, crime, or juvenile…”
State v. Young, 2011-Ohio-2646. “For purposes of criminal offenses, a person (including the person who is killed in an R.C. 2903.10(C) offense) includes an unborn human who is viable.”
Ohio Rev. Code § 2903.10(B): 1 case
State v. Cox, 2014-Ohio-2201, 12 N.E.3d 466. “In support of both motions, she argued that the State had failed to prove that she was in the relationship of caretaker, as defined in R.C. 2903.10(B), to K.W. at the time of the alleged offense.”
Ohio Rev. Code § 2903.10(C): 1 case
State v. Young, 2011-Ohio-2646. “For purposes of criminal offenses, a person (including the person who is killed in an R.C. 2903.10(C) offense) includes an unborn human who is viable.”
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.