(A) No person who is eighteen years of age or older shall engage in sexual conduct with another when the offender knows the other person is thirteen years of age or older but less than sixteen years of age, or the offender is reckless in that regard.
(B) Whoever violates this section is guilty of unlawful sexual conduct with a minor.
(1) Except as otherwise provided in divisions (B)(2), (3), and (4) of this section, unlawful sexual conduct with a minor is a felony of the fourth degree.
(2) Except as otherwise provided in division (B)(4) of this section, if the offender is less than four years older than the other person, unlawful sexual conduct with a minor is a misdemeanor of the first degree.
(3) Except as otherwise provided in division (B)(4) of this section, if the offender is ten or more years older than the other person, unlawful sexual conduct with a minor is a felony of the third degree.
(4) If the offender previously has been convicted of or pleaded guilty to a violation of section 2907.02, 2907.03, or 2907.04 of the Revised Code or a violation of former section 2907.12 of the Revised Code, unlawful sexual conduct with a minor is a felony of the second degree.
State v. Pendergrass (Slip Opinion), 2020 Ohio 3335 (Ohio 2020). · cites it 29ד{¶ 1} The statute that criminalizes unlawful sexual conduct with a minor, R.C. 2907.04, says that an offender is subject to an enhanced penalty if he SUPREME COURT OF OHIO “previously has been convicted of” certain listed sex crimes.”
State v. Blankenship (Slip Opinion), 2015 Ohio 4624 (Ohio 2015). · cites it 26ד{¶ 1} Appellant, Travis Blankenship, challenges as cruel and unusual punishment the sex-offender-registration and address-verification requirements imposed upon him as part of his sentence for violating R.C. 2907.04 by engaging in unlawful sexual conduct with M.”
State v. Mole (Slip Opinion), 2016 Ohio 5124 (Ohio 2016). · cites it 8ד{¶ 5} Mole was charged with one count of unlawful sexual conduct with a minor, R.C. 2907.04, which prohibits sexual conduct with a minor between the ages of 13 and 15 years old when the offender is 18 or older and knows the other person’s 2 January Term, 2016 age or is reckless…”
State v. Leopard, 2011 Ohio 3864 (Ohio Ct. App. 2011). · cites it 6ד{¶ 4} Based on the foregoing activity, Leopard was indicted on six counts of unlawful sexual conduct with a minor, in violation of R.C. 2907.04 (A), with specifications that he was ten or more years older than his victims.”
Phipps v. State, 2018 Ohio 720 (Ohio Ct. App. 2018). · cites it 14דThe state apparently abandoned this argument, because the state did not raise it at the hearing on Phipps’s motion to vacate the sexual-predator classification—in fact, the prosecutor specifically stated at the hearing that the statute to be considered was R.C. 2907.04—or on…”
State v. Thomas, 2018 Ohio 2815 (Ohio Ct. App. 2018). · cites it 13ד{¶ 19} Nevertheless, unlawful sexual conduct with a minor in violation of R.C. 2907.04 requires a Tier II sex offender label under R.”
State v. Maggette, 2016 Ohio 5554 (Ohio Ct. App. 2016). · cites it 3דMaggette (“Maggette”), appeals the February 10, 2016 judgment entry of sentence journalizing his conviction by a jury for one count of unlawful sexual conduct with a minor, in violation of R.C. 2907.04(A),(B)(3), a felony of the third degree, and one count of sexual imposition,…”
State v. Schentur, 2020 Ohio 1603 (Ohio Ct. App. 2020). · cites it 11דIn this case, Schentur was charged with four counts of unlawful sexual conduct with a minor in violation of R.C. 2907.04, which states that, (A) No person who is eighteen years of age or older shall engage in sexual conduct with another, who is not the spouse of the offender,…”
State v. Fawn, 465 N.E.2d 896 (Ohio Ct. App. 1983). · cites it 20ד, appeals his convictions on four counts of corruption of a minor (R.C. 2907.04). The victim, a thirteen-year-old girl, testified that she had engaged in sexual intercourse with defendant, who was about thirty-five years of age.”
State v. Clemons, 2011 Ohio 1177 (Ohio Ct. App. 2011). · cites it 12דBOTH THE CONVICTIONS AND SENTENCES ARE CONTRARY TO LAW UNDER THE VERSION OF R.C. 2907.04 THAT WAS EFFECTIVE IN 1998, THE DATE THAT THE OFFENSES WERE COMMITTED.”
State v. Williams, 2011 OH 3374 (Ohio 2011). · cites it 2דFactual and Procedural Background {¶ 1} In November 2007, appellant, George Williams, was indicted for unlawful sexual contact with a minor, a felony of the fourth degree under R.C. 2907.04. The indictment stated that Williams, "being eighteen years of age or older, did engage…”
State v. Wilson, 2022 Ohio 504 (Ohio Ct. App. 2022). · cites it 3ד41(B)(1)(c) include unlawful sexual conduct with a minor in violation of R.C. 2907.04; criminal damaging or endangering in violation of R.”
State v. Mole (Slip Opinion), 2016 Ohio 5124 (Ohio 2016). “{¶ 5} Mole was charged with one count of unlawful sexual conduct with a minor, R.C. 2907.04, which prohibits sexual conduct with a minor between the ages of 13 and 15 years old when the offender is 18 or older and knows the other person’s 2 January Term, 2016 age or is reckless…”
State v. Maggette, 2016 Ohio 5554 (Ohio Ct. App. 2016). “Maggette (“Maggette”), appeals the February 10, 2016 judgment entry of sentence journalizing his conviction by a jury for one count of unlawful sexual conduct with a minor, in violation of R.C. 2907.04(A),(B)(3), a felony of the third degree, and one count of sexual imposition,…”
Phipps v. State, 2018 Ohio 720 (Ohio Ct. App. 2018). “The state apparently abandoned this argument, because the state did not raise it at the hearing on Phipps’s motion to vacate the sexual-predator classification—in fact, the prosecutor specifically stated at the hearing that the statute to be considered was R.C. 2907.04—or on…”
State v. Blankenship (Slip Opinion), 2015 Ohio 4624 (Ohio 2015). “{¶ 1} Appellant, Travis Blankenship, challenges as cruel and unusual punishment the sex-offender-registration and address-verification requirements imposed upon him as part of his sentence for violating R.C. 2907.04 by engaging in unlawful sexual conduct with M.”
State v. Clemons, 2011 Ohio 1177 (Ohio Ct. App. 2011). “BOTH THE CONVICTIONS AND SENTENCES ARE CONTRARY TO LAW UNDER THE VERSION OF R.C. 2907.04 THAT WAS EFFECTIVE IN 1998, THE DATE THAT THE OFFENSES WERE COMMITTED.”
State v. Pendergrass (Slip Opinion), 2020 Ohio 3335 (Ohio 2020). “{¶ 1} The statute that criminalizes unlawful sexual conduct with a minor, R.C. 2907.04, says that an offender is subject to an enhanced penalty if he SUPREME COURT OF OHIO “previously has been convicted of” certain listed sex crimes.”
State v. Clemons, 2011 Ohio 1177 (Ohio Ct. App. 2011). “BOTH THE CONVICTIONS AND SENTENCES ARE CONTRARY TO LAW UNDER THE VERSION OF R.C. 2907.04 THAT WAS EFFECTIVE IN 1998, THE DATE THAT THE OFFENSES WERE COMMITTED.”
State v. Fawn, 465 N.E.2d 896 (Ohio Ct. App. 1983). “, appeals his convictions on four counts of corruption of a minor (R.C. 2907.04). The victim, a thirteen-year-old girl, testified that she had engaged in sexual intercourse with defendant, who was about thirty-five years of age.”
— Ohio Rev. Code § 2907.04(B)(1) — 8 cases
State v. Schentur, 2020 Ohio 1603 (Ohio Ct. App. 2020). “In this case, Schentur was charged with four counts of unlawful sexual conduct with a minor in violation of R.C. 2907.04, which states that, (A) No person who is eighteen years of age or older shall engage in sexual conduct with another, who is not the spouse of the offender,…”
State v. Thomas, 2018 Ohio 2815 (Ohio Ct. App. 2018). “{¶ 19} Nevertheless, unlawful sexual conduct with a minor in violation of R.C. 2907.04 requires a Tier II sex offender label under R.”
State v. Blankenship (Slip Opinion), 2015 Ohio 4624 (Ohio 2015). “{¶ 1} Appellant, Travis Blankenship, challenges as cruel and unusual punishment the sex-offender-registration and address-verification requirements imposed upon him as part of his sentence for violating R.C. 2907.04 by engaging in unlawful sexual conduct with M.”
State v. Schentur, 2020 Ohio 1603 (Ohio Ct. App. 2020). “In this case, Schentur was charged with four counts of unlawful sexual conduct with a minor in violation of R.C. 2907.04, which states that, (A) No person who is eighteen years of age or older shall engage in sexual conduct with another, who is not the spouse of the offender,…”
State v. Leopard, 2011 Ohio 3864 (Ohio Ct. App. 2011). “{¶ 4} Based on the foregoing activity, Leopard was indicted on six counts of unlawful sexual conduct with a minor, in violation of R.C. 2907.04 (A), with specifications that he was ten or more years older than his victims.”
State v. Blankenship (Slip Opinion), 2015 Ohio 4624 (Ohio 2015). “{¶ 1} Appellant, Travis Blankenship, challenges as cruel and unusual punishment the sex-offender-registration and address-verification requirements imposed upon him as part of his sentence for violating R.C. 2907.04 by engaging in unlawful sexual conduct with M.”
State v. Schentur, 2020 Ohio 1603 (Ohio Ct. App. 2020). “In this case, Schentur was charged with four counts of unlawful sexual conduct with a minor in violation of R.C. 2907.04, which states that, (A) No person who is eighteen years of age or older shall engage in sexual conduct with another, who is not the spouse of the offender,…”
— Ohio Rev. Code § 2907.04(B)(4) — 3 cases
State v. Pendergrass (Slip Opinion), 2020 Ohio 3335 (Ohio 2020). “{¶ 1} The statute that criminalizes unlawful sexual conduct with a minor, R.C. 2907.04, says that an offender is subject to an enhanced penalty if he SUPREME COURT OF OHIO “previously has been convicted of” certain listed sex crimes.”
State v. Blankenship (Slip Opinion), 2015 Ohio 4624 (Ohio 2015). “{¶ 1} Appellant, Travis Blankenship, challenges as cruel and unusual punishment the sex-offender-registration and address-verification requirements imposed upon him as part of his sentence for violating R.C. 2907.04 by engaging in unlawful sexual conduct with M.”
State v. Schentur, 2020 Ohio 1603 (Ohio Ct. App. 2020). “In this case, Schentur was charged with four counts of unlawful sexual conduct with a minor in violation of R.C. 2907.04, which states that, (A) No person who is eighteen years of age or older shall engage in sexual conduct with another, who is not the spouse of the offender,…”
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.