Ohio Revised Code

Ohio Rev. Code § 2917.12 (2026)

Disturbing a lawful meeting

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ORCcodes.ohio.gov (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Effective:

April 4, 2023

Latest Legislation:

Senate Bill 288, House Bill 504 - 134th General Assembly

PDF:

Download Authenticated PDF

(A) No person, with purpose to prevent or disrupt a lawful meeting, procession, or gathering, shall do either of the following:

(1) Do any act which obstructs or interferes with the due conduct of such meeting, procession, or gathering;

(2) Make any utterance, gesture, or display which outrages the sensibilities of the group.

(B) Whoever violates this section is guilty of disturbing a lawful meeting. Except as otherwise provided in this division, disturbing a lawful meeting is a misdemeanor of the fourth degree. Disturbing a lawful meeting is a misdemeanor of the first degree if either of the following applies:

(1) The violation is committed with the intent to disturb or disquiet any assemblage of people met for religious worship at a tax-exempt place of worship, regardless of whether the conduct is within the place at which the assemblage is held or is on the property on which that place is located and disturbs the order and solemnity of the assemblage.

(2) The violation is committed with the intent to prevent, disrupt, or interfere with a virtual meeting or gathering of people for religious worship, through use of a computer, computer system, telecommunications device, or other electronic device or system, or in any other manner.

(C) As used in this section:

(1) "Computer," "computer system," and "telecommunications device" have the same meanings as in section 2913.01 of the Revised Code.

(2) "Virtual meeting or gathering" means a meeting or gathering by interactive video conference or teleconference, or by a combination thereof.

Last updated March 6, 2023 at 9:30 AM

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 16 cases (6 in the last 5 years), 1965–2026 · leading case: State v. Brand, 442 N.E.2d 805 (Ohio Ct. App. 1981).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

State v. Brand, 442 N.E.2d 805 (Ohio Ct. App. 1981). · cites it 9× “The defendant-appellant, James Brand, seeks reversal of his conviction by a jury of disturbing a lawful meeting in violation of R.C. 2917.12, 1 alleging two assignments of error: (1) that the court erred in not granting his motions for dismissal and acquittal; and (2) that the…”

State v. Wolf, 677 N.E.2d 371 (Ohio Ct. App. 1996). · cites it 12× “Appellant complains that appellee did not present sufficient evidence to sustain a conviction under R.”

Van Hull v. Marriott Courtyard, 87 F. Supp. 2d 771 (N.D. Ohio 2000). · cites it 3× “Couture and Van Hull should not have been arrested because they never received a warning to “cease and desist” their conduct, as is statutorily required before arresting someone for a fourth degree offense.”

Trimbach v. Bath Twp., 2021 Ohio 2058 (Ohio Ct. App. 2021). · cites it 2× “2917.32). Finally, in this paragraph, Trimbach alleges that the actions of his co-workers “violated certain provisions of Chapter 517 Ohio Revised Code.”

State v. Hollingshead, 2023 Ohio 1714 (Ohio Ct. App. 2023). “For example, R.C. 2917.12(B) states that [w]hoever violates this section is guilty of disturbing a lawful meeting” and subsections (A)(1)-(2) describe acts that can reasonably be viewed as a means by which a lawful meeting might be disturbed.”

City of Toledo v. Thompson-Bean, 879 N.E.2d 799 (Ohio Ct. App. 2007). · cites it 2× “That statute was repealed and replaced with R.C. 2917.12, which now prohibits acts done “with purpose to prevent or disrupt a lawful meeting, procession, or gathering * * Following Schwing , R.”

City of Columbus v. Doyle, 776 N.E.2d 537 (Ohio Ct. App. 2002). · cites it 3× “The plain meaning is that it prohibits any person from acting with a purpose to prevent or disrupt a lawful gathering and from succeeding in that effort by actually obstructing or interfering with its due conduct.”

Bishop v. Reagan-Bush '84 Comm., 635 F. Supp. 1020 (S.D. Ohio 1986). “Ohio Revised Code § 2917.12 provides: (A) No person, with purpose to prevent or disrupt a lawful meeting, procession, or gathering shall do either of the following: (1) Do any act which obstructs or interferes with the due conduct of such meeting, procession, or gathering; (2)…”

Nelsonville v. Nguyen, 2026 Ohio 1699 (Ohio Ct. App. 2026). · cites it 24× “Additionally, the State contends that R.C. 2917.12 was most recently Athens App.”

State v. Michalos, 2018 Ohio 4801 (Ohio Ct. App. 2018). “11(A)(2) and R.C. 2917.12(A)(2). The charges stem from a January 23, 2017 city of Conneaut council meeting.”

Myers v. Vill. of New Holland (S.D. Ohio 2022). · cites it 6× “22, and Disturbing a Lawful Meeting, ORC § 2917.12. (ECF No. 28 at ¶ 51). The menacing charge was dismissed, and the disturbing a lawful meeting charge was reduced to a lesser offense, a minor misdemeanor of disorderly conduct, to which Plaintiff pled guilty.”

Farley v. Vill. of New Lebanon (S.D. Ohio 2024). · cites it 2× “) Arriola made a pre- planned hand signal and Hensley himself proceeded to arrest Farley for disturbing a public meeting, in violation of Ohio Rev. Code § 2917.12. (Id.) A number of citizens in attendance allegedly objected to Farley’s arrest.”

Show all 16 citing cases →

— Ohio Rev. Code § 2917.12(A) — 1 case

Nelsonville v. Nguyen, 2026 Ohio 1699 (Ohio Ct. App. 2026). “Additionally, the State contends that R.C. 2917.12 was most recently Athens App.”

— Ohio Rev. Code § 2917.12(A)(1) — 3 cases

State v. Wolf, 677 N.E.2d 371 (Ohio Ct. App. 1996). “Appellant complains that appellee did not present sufficient evidence to sustain a conviction under R.”

Nelsonville v. Nguyen, 2026 Ohio 1699 (Ohio Ct. App. 2026). “Additionally, the State contends that R.C. 2917.12 was most recently Athens App.”

Zanesville v. Jones, 2017 Ohio 1112 (Ohio Ct. App. 2017).

— Ohio Rev. Code § 2917.12(A)(2) — 1 case

State v. Michalos, 2018 Ohio 4801 (Ohio Ct. App. 2018). “11(A)(2) and R.C. 2917.12(A)(2). The charges stem from a January 23, 2017 city of Conneaut council meeting.”

— Ohio Rev. Code § 2917.12(B) — 1 case

State v. Hollingshead, 2023 Ohio 1714 (Ohio Ct. App. 2023). “For example, R.C. 2917.12(B) states that [w]hoever violates this section is guilty of disturbing a lawful meeting” and subsections (A)(1)-(2) describe acts that can reasonably be viewed as a means by which a lawful meeting might be disturbed.”

— Ohio Rev. Code § 2917.12(E) — 1 case

Van Hull v. Marriott Courtyard, 87 F. Supp. 2d 771 (N.D. Ohio 2000). “Couture and Van Hull should not have been arrested because they never received a warning to “cease and desist” their conduct, as is statutorily required before arresting someone for a fourth degree offense.”

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.