Ohio Rev. Code » Chapter 2907
Ohio Revised Code

Ohio Rev. Code § 2907.41 (2026)

Person charged with subsequent sexual offense - setting of bail

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

(A) Subject to division (D) of this section, a person who is charged with the commission of any sexually oriented offense or with a violation of section 2907.09 of the Revised Code shall appear before the court for the setting of bail if the person charged previously was convicted of or pleaded guilty to a sexually oriented offense, a violation of section 2907.09 of the Revised Code, or a violation of an existing or former municipal ordinance or law of this or any other state or the United States that is substantially similar to section 2907.09 of the Revised Code.

(B) To the extent that information about any of the following is available to the court, the court, in addition to any other circumstances considered by the court and notwithstanding any provisions to the contrary contained in section 2937.011 of the Revised Code, shall consider all of the following before setting bail for a person who appears before the court pursuant to division (A) of this section:

(1) Whether the person previously has been adjudicated a sexual predator or child-victim predator pursuant to Chapter 2950. of the Revised Code, previously has been determined to be a habitual sex offender or habitual child-victim offender pursuant to that chapter, has a history of committing sexually oriented offenses or child-victim oriented offenses, or has a history of committing violations of section 2907.09 of the Revised Code or violations of an existing or former municipal ordinance or law of this or any other state or the United States that is substantially similar to that section;

(2) The mental health of the person;

(3) Whether the person has a history of violating the orders of any court or governmental entity;

(4) Whether the person is potentially a threat to any other person;

(5) Whether the person has access to deadly weapons or a history of using deadly weapons;

(6) Whether the person has a history of abusing alcohol or any controlled substance;

(7) The severity of the alleged conduct of the person that is the basis of the offense, including but not limited to, the duration of the alleged conduct, and whether the alleged conduct involved physical injury, assault, violence, or forcible entry to gain access to an alleged victim;

(8) Whether the person has exhibited obsessive or controlling behaviors toward another person, including, but not limited to, stalking, surveillance, or isolation of another person;

(9) Whether the person has expressed suicidal or homicidal ideations;

(10) Any information contained in the complaint and any police reports, affidavits, or other documents accompanying the complaint.

(C) Any court that has jurisdiction over charges alleging the commission of a sexually oriented offense or a violation of section 2907.09 of the Revised Code, in circumstances in which the person charged previously was convicted of or pleaded guilty to any of the offenses or violations described in division (A) of this section, may set a schedule for bail to be used in cases involving those offenses and violations. The schedule shall require that a judge consider all of the factors listed in division (B) of this section and may require judges to set bail at a certain level if the history of the alleged offender or the circumstances of the alleged offense meet certain criteria in the schedule.

(D)(1) Upon the court's own motion or the motion of a party and upon any terms that the court may direct, a court may permit a person who is required to appear before it by division (A) of this section to appear by video conferencing equipment.

(2) If, in the opinion of the court, the appearance in person or by video conferencing equipment of a person who is charged with a misdemeanor and who is required to appear before the court by division (A) of this section is not practicable, the court may waive the appearance and release the person on bail in accordance with the court's schedule for bail set under division (C) of this section or, if the court has not set a schedule for bail under that division, on one or both of the following types of bail in an amount set by the court:

(a) A bail bond secured by a deposit of ten per cent of the amount of the bond in cash;

(b) A surety bond, a bond secured by real estate or securities as allowed by law, or the deposit of cash, at the option of the person.

(3) Division (A) of this section does not create a right in a person to appear before the court for the setting of bail or prohibit a court from requiring any person charged with a sexually oriented offense or a violation of section 2907.09 of the Revised Code who is not described in that division from appearing before the court for the setting of bail.

(E) As used in this section, "child-victim oriented offense," "child-victim predator," "habitual child-victim offender," "habitual sex offender," "sexually oriented offense," and "sexual predator" have the same meanings as in section 2950.01 of the Revised Code.

Last updated July 18, 2023 at 12:32 PM

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 14 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1987–2024 · leading case: State v. Self, 564 N.E.2d 446 (Ohio 1990).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Self, 564 N.E.2d 446 (Ohio 1990). · cites it 19× “4-1 (A) Videotaped Deposition Procedure R.C. 2907.41, enacted in 1986, is intended to protect child sexual abuse victims from traumatization in an “intimidating courtroom atmosphere” while preserving the right of the accused to confront the witnesses against him.”
State v. Sibert, 648 N.E.2d 861 (Ohio Ct. App. 1994). · cites it 14× “” Division (E) of R.C. 2907.41 provides: “For purposes of divisions (C) and (D) of this section, a judge may order the testimony of a child victim to be taken outside the room in which the proceeding is being conducted if the judge determines that the child victim is unavailable…”
Maryland v. Craig, 497 U.S. 836 (1990). · cites it 4× “§ 30-9-17 (1984); Ohio Rev. Code Ann. §§ 2907.41 (A), (B), (D), (E) (1987); Okla.”
State v. Payton, 696 N.E.2d 240 (Ohio Ct. App. 1997). · cites it 6× “On June 30, 1993, the prosecution filed a motion to videotape Amanda’s testimony pursuant to R.C. 2907.41. After conducting a hearing on July 26, 1993 on the issue of videotaping Amanda’s testimony, the trial court granted the prosecution’s motion by judgment entry dated August…”
State v. Eastham, 530 N.E.2d 409 (Ohio 1988). · cites it 2× “See R.C. 2907.41; N.Y. Crim. Proc. Law 65.00-65.”
Miller v. State, 517 N.E.2d 64 (Ind. 1987). · cites it 2× “); Ohio Rev.Code Ann. § 2907.41 (Page 1987 Supp.”
State v. Knauff, 2011 Ohio 2725 (Ohio Ct. App. 2011). · cites it 3× “Craig at 1 Although the General Assembly recodified R.C. 2907.41 as R.C. 2945.481 in 1997, for the issues in this appeal, it is substantially identical to its prior version.”
State v. Boston, 545 N.E.2d 1220 (Ohio 1989). “The General Assembly has taken a step in that direction with the passage of R.C. 2907.41 [effective Oct. 14, 1986] which deals with child victim’s testimony.”
Ohio Ass'n of Pub. Sch. Employees v. Lakewood City Sch. Dist. Bd. of Educ., 68 Ohio St. 3d 175 (Ohio 1994). “2d 446 (use of child victim’s videotaped testimony in child sex abuse case, in accordance with R.C. 2907.41[A] and [B], does not violate Ohio or federal Confrontation Clauses); White v.”
State v. Carter, 2022 Ohio 4559 (Ohio Ct. App. 2022). · cites it 3× “Self, the Supreme Court of Ohio determined that R.C. 2907.41, which permitted the use of a child sexual abuse victim’s videotaped deposition at trial in place of live testimony, does not violate the Ohio or federal confrontation clauses.”
State v. Vaughn, 667 N.E.2d 82 (Ohio Ct. App. 1995). “The victim testified at trial by videotaped deposition pursuant to R.C. 2907.41. 3 . Appellant also asserts one additional “error,” claiming that his rights under the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution were violated.”
State v. Cooper, 743 N.E.2d 427 (Ohio Ct. App. 2000). “This statute is the recodified version of R.C. 2907.41(B)(1)(b), which contained precisely the same standard for a trial court's determination whether to allow videotaped testimony of a child victim in lieu of live testimony.”
Show all 14 citing cases →
— Ohio Rev. Code § 2907.41(A) — 4 cases
State v. Self, 564 N.E.2d 446 (Ohio 1990). “4-1 (A) Videotaped Deposition Procedure R.C. 2907.41, enacted in 1986, is intended to protect child sexual abuse victims from traumatization in an “intimidating courtroom atmosphere” while preserving the right of the accused to confront the witnesses against him.”
State v. Sibert, 648 N.E.2d 861 (Ohio Ct. App. 1994). “” Division (E) of R.C. 2907.41 provides: “For purposes of divisions (C) and (D) of this section, a judge may order the testimony of a child victim to be taken outside the room in which the proceeding is being conducted if the judge determines that the child victim is unavailable…”
State v. Knauff, 2011 Ohio 2725 (Ohio Ct. App. 2011). “Craig at 1 Although the General Assembly recodified R.C. 2907.41 as R.C. 2945.481 in 1997, for the issues in this appeal, it is substantially identical to its prior version.”
State v. Saunders, 2024 Ohio 2224 (Ohio Ct. App. 2024).
— Ohio Rev. Code § 2907.41(A)(1) — 1 case
State v. Payton, 696 N.E.2d 240 (Ohio Ct. App. 1997). “On June 30, 1993, the prosecution filed a motion to videotape Amanda’s testimony pursuant to R.C. 2907.41. After conducting a hearing on July 26, 1993 on the issue of videotaping Amanda’s testimony, the trial court granted the prosecution’s motion by judgment entry dated August…”
— Ohio Rev. Code § 2907.41(A)(2) — 1 case
State v. Self, 564 N.E.2d 446 (Ohio 1990). “4-1 (A) Videotaped Deposition Procedure R.C. 2907.41, enacted in 1986, is intended to protect child sexual abuse victims from traumatization in an “intimidating courtroom atmosphere” while preserving the right of the accused to confront the witnesses against him.”
— Ohio Rev. Code § 2907.41(B)(1) — 1 case
State v. Self, 564 N.E.2d 446 (Ohio 1990). “4-1 (A) Videotaped Deposition Procedure R.C. 2907.41, enacted in 1986, is intended to protect child sexual abuse victims from traumatization in an “intimidating courtroom atmosphere” while preserving the right of the accused to confront the witnesses against him.”
— Ohio Rev. Code § 2907.41(B)(1)(b) — 3 cases
State v. Self, 564 N.E.2d 446 (Ohio 1990). “4-1 (A) Videotaped Deposition Procedure R.C. 2907.41, enacted in 1986, is intended to protect child sexual abuse victims from traumatization in an “intimidating courtroom atmosphere” while preserving the right of the accused to confront the witnesses against him.”
State v. Knauff, 2011 Ohio 2725 (Ohio Ct. App. 2011). “Craig at 1 Although the General Assembly recodified R.C. 2907.41 as R.C. 2945.481 in 1997, for the issues in this appeal, it is substantially identical to its prior version.”
State v. Cooper, 743 N.E.2d 427 (Ohio Ct. App. 2000). “This statute is the recodified version of R.C. 2907.41(B)(1)(b), which contained precisely the same standard for a trial court's determination whether to allow videotaped testimony of a child victim in lieu of live testimony.”
— Ohio Rev. Code § 2907.41(C) — 3 cases
State v. Sibert, 648 N.E.2d 861 (Ohio Ct. App. 1994). “” Division (E) of R.C. 2907.41 provides: “For purposes of divisions (C) and (D) of this section, a judge may order the testimony of a child victim to be taken outside the room in which the proceeding is being conducted if the judge determines that the child victim is unavailable…”
Maryland v. Craig, 497 U.S. 836 (1990). “§ 30-9-17 (1984); Ohio Rev. Code Ann. §§ 2907.41 (A), (B), (D), (E) (1987); Okla.”
State v. Self, 564 N.E.2d 446 (Ohio 1990). “4-1 (A) Videotaped Deposition Procedure R.C. 2907.41, enacted in 1986, is intended to protect child sexual abuse victims from traumatization in an “intimidating courtroom atmosphere” while preserving the right of the accused to confront the witnesses against him.”
— Ohio Rev. Code § 2907.41(D) — 1 case
State v. Self, 564 N.E.2d 446 (Ohio 1990). “4-1 (A) Videotaped Deposition Procedure R.C. 2907.41, enacted in 1986, is intended to protect child sexual abuse victims from traumatization in an “intimidating courtroom atmosphere” while preserving the right of the accused to confront the witnesses against him.”
— Ohio Rev. Code § 2907.41(E) — 1 case
State v. Self, 564 N.E.2d 446 (Ohio 1990). “4-1 (A) Videotaped Deposition Procedure R.C. 2907.41, enacted in 1986, is intended to protect child sexual abuse victims from traumatization in an “intimidating courtroom atmosphere” while preserving the right of the accused to confront the witnesses against him.”
— Ohio Rev. Code § 2907.41(E)(3) — 1 case
State v. Sibert, 648 N.E.2d 861 (Ohio Ct. App. 1994). “” Division (E) of R.C. 2907.41 provides: “For purposes of divisions (C) and (D) of this section, a judge may order the testimony of a child victim to be taken outside the room in which the proceeding is being conducted if the judge determines that the child victim is unavailable…”
— Ohio Rev. Code § 2907.41(F)(2) — 1 case
State v. Payton, 696 N.E.2d 240 (Ohio Ct. App. 1997). “On June 30, 1993, the prosecution filed a motion to videotape Amanda’s testimony pursuant to R.C. 2907.41. After conducting a hearing on July 26, 1993 on the issue of videotaping Amanda’s testimony, the trial court granted the prosecution’s motion by judgment entry dated August…”
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.