Ohio Rev. Code » Chapter 2919
Ohio Revised Code

Ohio Rev. Code § 2919.21 (2026)

Nonsupport or contributing to nonsupport of dependents

✓ 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, 2023
Latest Legislation:
House Bill 281 - 134th General Assembly
PDF:
Download Authenticated PDF
 

(A) No person shall abandon, or fail to provide adequate support to:

(1) The person's spouse, as required by law;

(2) The person's child who is under age eighteen, or the persons's child with a mental or physical disability who is under age twenty-one;

(3) The person's aged or infirm parent or adoptive parent, who from lack of ability and means is unable to provide adequately for the parent's own support.

(B)(1) No person shall abandon, or fail to provide support as established by a court order to, another person whom, by court order or decree, the person:

(a) Is legally obligated to support; or

(b) Was legally obligated to support, and an amount for support:

(i) Was due and owing prior to the date the person's duty to pay current support terminated; and

(ii) Remains unpaid.

(2) The period of limitation under section 2901.13 of the Revised Code applicable to division (B)(1)(b) of this section shall begin to run on the date the person's duty to pay current support terminates.

(C) No person shall aid, abet, induce, cause, encourage, or contribute to a child or a ward of the juvenile court becoming a dependent child, as defined in section 2151.04 of the Revised Code, or a neglected child, as defined in section 2151.03 of the Revised Code.

(D) It is an affirmative defense to a charge of failure to provide adequate support under division (A) of this section or a charge of failure to provide support established by a court order under division (B) of this section that the accused was unable to provide adequate support or the established support but did provide the support that was within the accused's ability and means.

(E) It is an affirmative defense to a charge under division (A)(3) of this section that the parent abandoned the accused or failed to support the accused as required by law, while the accused was under age eighteen, or had a mental or physical disability and was under age twenty-one.

(F) It is not a defense to a charge under division (B) of this section that the person whom a court has ordered the accused to support is being adequately supported by someone other than the accused.

(G)(1) Except as otherwise provided in this division, whoever violates division (A) or (B) of this section is guilty of nonsupport of dependents, a misdemeanor of the first degree. If the offender previously has been convicted of or pleaded guilty to a violation of division (A)(2) or (B) of this section or if the offender has failed to provide support under division (A)(2) or (B) of this section for a total accumulated period of twenty-six weeks out of one hundred four consecutive weeks, whether or not the twenty-six weeks were consecutive, then a violation of division (A)(2) or (B) of this section is a felony of the fifth degree. If the offender previously has been convicted of or pleaded guilty to a felony violation of this section, a violation of division (A)(2) or (B) of this section is a felony of the fourth degree.

If the violation of division (A) or (B) of this section is a felony, all of the following apply to the sentencing of the offender:

(a) Except as otherwise provided in division (G)(1)(b) of this section, the court in imposing sentence on the offender shall first consider placing the offender on one or more community control sanctions under section 2929.16, 2929.17, or 2929.18 of the Revised Code, with an emphasis under the sanctions on intervention for nonsupport, obtaining or maintaining employment, or another related condition.

(b) The preference for placement on community control sanctions described in division (G)(1)(a) of this section does not apply to any offender to whom one or more of the following applies:

(i) The court determines that the imposition of a prison term on the offender is consistent with the purposes and principles of sentencing set forth in section 2929.11 of the Revised Code.

(ii) The offender previously was convicted of or pleaded guilty to a violation of this section that was a felony, and the offender was sentenced to a prison term for that violation.

(iii) The offender previously was convicted of or pleaded guilty to a violation of this section that was a felony, the offender was sentenced to one or more community control sanctions of a type described in division (G)(1)(a) of this section for that violation, and the offender failed to comply with the conditions of any of those community control sanctions.

(2) If the offender is guilty of nonsupport of dependents by reason of failing to provide support to the offender's child as required by a child support order issued on or after April 15, 1985, pursuant to section 2151.23, 2151.231, 2151.232, 2151.33, 3105.21, 3109.05, 3111.13, 3113.04, 3113.31, 3115.401, or former section 3115.31 of the Revised Code, the court, in addition to any other sentence imposed, shall assess all court costs arising out of the charge against the person and require the person to pay any reasonable attorney's fees of any adverse party other than the state, as determined by the court, that arose in relation to the charge.

(3) Whoever violates division (C) of this section is guilty of contributing to the nonsupport of dependents, a misdemeanor of the first degree. Each day of violation of division (C) of this section is a separate offense.

Last updated March 10, 2023 at 11:18 AM

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 212 cases (41 in the last 5 years), 1975–2026 · leading case: State v. Pittman (Slip Opinion), 2016-Ohio-8314, 79 N.E.3d 531.
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Pittman (Slip Opinion), 2016-Ohio-8314, 79 N.E.3d 531. · cites it 45× “{¶ 6} Counts 1 through 6 alleged fourth-degree felonies under R.C. 2919.21 because Pittman had been convicted of or pleaded guilty to a previous felony violation of nonsupport under R.”
State v. Swazey, 2023-Ohio-4627, 238 N.E.3d 9. · cites it 36× “Background {¶ 3} In December 2019, Swazey was indicted on three felony counts of nonsupport of a dependent, in violation of R.C. 2919.21(B). The indictment alleged that Swazey had violated court orders to support his child, K.”
State v. Collins, 733 N.E.2d 1118 (Ohio 2000). · cites it 24× “” The court of appeals determined that the legislature did not specify a mental element for culpability in R.C. 2919.21, or plainly indicate a purpose to impose strict liability.”
State v. Beach, 772 N.E.2d 677 (Ohio Ct. App. 1st Dist. 2002). · cites it 18× “00CA007749, 2001-0hio-1642, 2001 WL 1280226 (holding that a defendant could be jailed for contempt for failure to pay court-ordered support and then prosecuted criminally under R.C. 2919.21[A][2]). 5 . See State v. Joy (1995), 74 Ohio St.”
State v. Brown (Slip Opinion), 2020-Ohio-4623, 162 N.E.3d 769. · cites it 25× “21(A)(2) (providing at the time Brown was charged that “[n]o person shall abandon, or fail to provide adequate support to * * * [t]he person’s child who is under age eighteen, or [the person’s] mentally or physically handicapped child who is under age twenty-one,” 2015…”
In re Adoption of B.I. (Slip Opinion), 2019-Ohio-2450. · cites it 8× “, the Fifth District determined that the criminal statute provides the applicable “law” in “as required by law.”
State v. Collins, 89 Ohio St. 3d 524 (2000). · cites it 27× “] Criminal law—Nonsupport of dependents—R.C. 2919.21, construed and applied. (No.”
State v. Parr, 2019-Ohio-4011, 145 N.E.3d 1171. · cites it 28× “) {¶ 4} Appellant filed documents regarding his child support obligation in the trial court. The documents demonstrated that, on October 15, 2014, the Franklin County Child Support Enforcement Agency ("FCCSEA") issued findings and recommendations to terminate appellant's support…”
State v. Ewing, 2021-Ohio-2220. · cites it 34× “* * * It is not an affirmative defense to prosecution under R.C. 2919.21 that the child is being adequately supported by a party other than defendant.”
State v. Wiley, 2014-Ohio-27. · cites it 26× “: {¶1} Defendant-appellant Ricky Wiley appeals from his convictions for criminal nonsupport in violation of R.C. 2919.21(B) and an order of restitution imposed by the trial court.”
State v. Flontek, 693 N.E.2d 767 (Ohio 1998). · cites it 24× “R.C. 2919.21 does not define the term “support,” nor does it provide any guidance with respect to specific legal duties owed by an adult child to a dependent parent.”
City of Columbus v. Bickel, 601 N.E.2d 61 (Ohio Ct. App. 10th Dist. 1991). · cites it 10× “Thus, it would not be necessary for the municipal court to wait for a criminal conviction under R.C. 2919.21 in order to revoke appellant’s probation because of his alleged failure to abide by the criminal law pursuant to R.”
Show all 212 citing cases →
Ohio Rev. Code § 2919.21(A): 14 cases
City of Columbus v. Bickel, 601 N.E.2d 61 (Ohio Ct. App. 10th Dist. 1991). “Thus, it would not be necessary for the municipal court to wait for a criminal conviction under R.C. 2919.21 in order to revoke appellant’s probation because of his alleged failure to abide by the criminal law pursuant to R.”
State v. Ramos, 2016-Ohio-7685.
State v. Beach, 772 N.E.2d 677 (Ohio Ct. App. 1st Dist. 2002). “00CA007749, 2001-0hio-1642, 2001 WL 1280226 (holding that a defendant could be jailed for contempt for failure to pay court-ordered support and then prosecuted criminally under R.C. 2919.21[A][2]). 5 . See State v. Joy (1995), 74 Ohio St.”
State v. Collins, 733 N.E.2d 1118 (Ohio 2000). “” The court of appeals determined that the legislature did not specify a mental element for culpability in R.C. 2919.21, or plainly indicate a purpose to impose strict liability.”
State v. Ewing, 2021-Ohio-2220. “* * * It is not an affirmative defense to prosecution under R.C. 2919.21 that the child is being adequately supported by a party other than defendant.”
Ohio Rev. Code § 2919.21(A)(2): 42 cases
In re Adoption of B.I. (Slip Opinion), 2019-Ohio-2450. “, the Fifth District determined that the criminal statute provides the applicable “law” in “as required by law.”
State v. Beach, 772 N.E.2d 677 (Ohio Ct. App. 1st Dist. 2002). “00CA007749, 2001-0hio-1642, 2001 WL 1280226 (holding that a defendant could be jailed for contempt for failure to pay court-ordered support and then prosecuted criminally under R.C. 2919.21[A][2]). 5 . See State v. Joy (1995), 74 Ohio St.”
State v. Ewing, 2021-Ohio-2220. “* * * It is not an affirmative defense to prosecution under R.C. 2919.21 that the child is being adequately supported by a party other than defendant.”
State v. Cole, 641 N.E.2d 732 (Ohio Ct. App. 1st Dist. 1994).
State v. Hubbard, 2018-Ohio-3627, 119 N.E.3d 798.
Ohio Rev. Code § 2919.21(A)(3): 5 cases
State v. Flontek, 693 N.E.2d 767 (Ohio 1998). “R.C. 2919.21 does not define the term “support,” nor does it provide any guidance with respect to specific legal duties owed by an adult child to a dependent parent.”
State v. Holder, 594 N.E.2d 981 (Ohio Ct. App. 12th Dist. 1991).
State v. Flontek, 82 Ohio St. 3d 10 (1998).
St. Clare Ctr., Inc. v. Mueller, 517 N.E.2d 236 (Ohio Ct. App. 1st Dist. 1986).
State v. Flontek, 680 N.E.2d 1021 (Ohio 1997).
Ohio Rev. Code § 2919.21(A)(4): 5 cases
State v. Harding, 611 N.E.2d 974 (Ohio Ct. App. 2d Dist. 1992).
State v. Parsley, 639 N.E.2d 1234 (Ohio Ct. App. 6th Dist. 1994).
State v. Cole, 641 N.E.2d 732 (Ohio Ct. App. 1st Dist. 1994).
State v. Jackson, 2011-Ohio-6707.
State v. Baker, 2024-Ohio-5990, 258 N.E.3d 1268.
Ohio Rev. Code § 2919.21(A)(5): 1 case
Hicks v. Faris, No. 1:20-cv-00680 (S.D. Ohio Aug. 30, 2024).
Ohio Rev. Code § 2919.21(B): 107 cases
State v. Pittman (Slip Opinion), 2016-Ohio-8314, 79 N.E.3d 531. “{¶ 6} Counts 1 through 6 alleged fourth-degree felonies under R.C. 2919.21 because Pittman had been convicted of or pleaded guilty to a previous felony violation of nonsupport under R.”
State v. Collins, 733 N.E.2d 1118 (Ohio 2000). “” The court of appeals determined that the legislature did not specify a mental element for culpability in R.C. 2919.21, or plainly indicate a purpose to impose strict liability.”
State v. Swazey, 2023-Ohio-4627, 238 N.E.3d 9. “Background {¶ 3} In December 2019, Swazey was indicted on three felony counts of nonsupport of a dependent, in violation of R.C. 2919.21(B). The indictment alleged that Swazey had violated court orders to support his child, K.”
State v. Brown (Slip Opinion), 2020-Ohio-4623, 162 N.E.3d 769. “21(A)(2) (providing at the time Brown was charged that “[n]o person shall abandon, or fail to provide adequate support to * * * [t]he person’s child who is under age eighteen, or [the person’s] mentally or physically handicapped child who is under age twenty-one,” 2015…”
State v. Collins, 89 Ohio St. 3d 524 (2000). “] Criminal law—Nonsupport of dependents—R.C. 2919.21, construed and applied. (No.”
Ohio Rev. Code § 2919.21(B)(1): 3 cases
State v. Swazey, 2023-Ohio-4627, 238 N.E.3d 9. “Background {¶ 3} In December 2019, Swazey was indicted on three felony counts of nonsupport of a dependent, in violation of R.C. 2919.21(B). The indictment alleged that Swazey had violated court orders to support his child, K.”
State v. Jouett, 2026-Ohio-1704.
State v. Knowlton, 2024-Ohio-4738.
Ohio Rev. Code § 2919.21(B)(1)(a): 1 case
State v. Minshall, 2024-Ohio-1035.
Ohio Rev. Code § 2919.21(B)(1)(b): 3 cases
State v. Swazey, 2023-Ohio-4627, 238 N.E.3d 9. “Background {¶ 3} In December 2019, Swazey was indicted on three felony counts of nonsupport of a dependent, in violation of R.C. 2919.21(B). The indictment alleged that Swazey had violated court orders to support his child, K.”
State v. Dobson, 2024-Ohio-4617.
State v. Hickman, 2024-Ohio-6065.
Ohio Rev. Code § 2919.21(B)(4): 1 case
State v. Jackson, 2011-Ohio-6707.
Ohio Rev. Code § 2919.21(C): 4 cases
Derungs v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 162 F. Supp. 2d 861 (S.D. Ohio 2001).
State v. Vlad, 790 N.E.2d 1246 (Ohio Ct. App. 7th Dist. 2003).
State v. Risner, 698 N.E.2d 511 (Ohio Ct. App. 3d Dist. 1997).
State v. Jackson, 2022-Ohio-4316, 203 N.E.3d 12.
Ohio Rev. Code § 2919.21(D): 28 cases
State v. Wiley, 2014-Ohio-27. “: {¶1} Defendant-appellant Ricky Wiley appeals from his convictions for criminal nonsupport in violation of R.C. 2919.21(B) and an order of restitution imposed by the trial court.”
State v. Curtis, 2020-Ohio-4152, 157 N.E.3d 879.
State v. Tull, 858 N.E.2d 828 (Ohio Ct. App. 2d Dist. 2006).
State v. Ewing, 2021-Ohio-2220. “* * * It is not an affirmative defense to prosecution under R.C. 2919.21 that the child is being adequately supported by a party other than defendant.”
State v. Chapman (Slip Opinion), 2020-Ohio-6730, 170 N.E.3d 6.
Ohio Rev. Code § 2919.21(E): 3 cases
State v. Cole, 641 N.E.2d 732 (Ohio Ct. App. 1st Dist. 1994).
State v. Lizanich, 639 N.E.2d 855 (Ohio Ct. App. 10th Dist. 1994).
State v. East, 638 N.E.2d 172 (Ohio Ct. App. 3d Dist. 1994).
Ohio Rev. Code § 2919.21(F): 2 cases
In re Adoption of A.S., 2011-Ohio-1505.
State v. Jouett, 2026-Ohio-1704.
Ohio Rev. Code § 2919.21(G): 1 case
State v. Beach, 772 N.E.2d 677 (Ohio Ct. App. 1st Dist. 2002). “00CA007749, 2001-0hio-1642, 2001 WL 1280226 (holding that a defendant could be jailed for contempt for failure to pay court-ordered support and then prosecuted criminally under R.C. 2919.21[A][2]). 5 . See State v. Joy (1995), 74 Ohio St.”
Ohio Rev. Code § 2919.21(G)(1): 29 cases
City of Cleveland Heights v. Lewis, 2011-Ohio-2673, 129 Ohio St. 3d 389.
State v. Pittman (Slip Opinion), 2016-Ohio-8314, 79 N.E.3d 531. “{¶ 6} Counts 1 through 6 alleged fourth-degree felonies under R.C. 2919.21 because Pittman had been convicted of or pleaded guilty to a previous felony violation of nonsupport under R.”
State v. Swazey, 2023-Ohio-4627, 238 N.E.3d 9. “Background {¶ 3} In December 2019, Swazey was indicted on three felony counts of nonsupport of a dependent, in violation of R.C. 2919.21(B). The indictment alleged that Swazey had violated court orders to support his child, K.”
State v. Curtis, 2020-Ohio-4152, 157 N.E.3d 879.
In re Adoption of A.C.B. (Slip Opinion), 2020-Ohio-629, 150 N.E.3d 82.
Ohio Rev. Code § 2919.21(G)(1)(a): 2 cases
State v. Spencer, 2014-Ohio-5430.
State v. Johnson, 2013-Ohio-2275.
Ohio Rev. Code § 2919.21(G)(1)(b): 1 case
State v. Johnson, 2013-Ohio-2275.
Ohio Rev. Code § 2919.21(G)(1)(b)(i): 1 case
State v. Johnson, 2013-Ohio-2275.
Ohio Rev. Code § 2919.21(G)(2): 1 case
State v. Hodge, 2015-Ohio-3724.
Ohio Rev. Code § 2919.21(G)(b)(i): 1 case
State v. Johnson, 2013-Ohio-2275.
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.