Ohio Rev. Code » Chapter 2925
Ohio Revised Code

Ohio Rev. Code § 2925.511 (2026)

Reimbursement for costs of positive drug tests

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ORCcodes.ohio.gov (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
Effective:
October 12, 2006
Latest Legislation:
House Bill 163 - 126th General Assembly
PDF:
Download Authenticated PDF
 

In addition to the financial sanctions authorized or required under sections 2929.18 and 2929.28 of the Revised Code and to any costs otherwise authorized or required under any provision of law, the court imposing sentence upon an offender who is convicted of or pleads guilty to a drug abuse offense may order the offender to pay to the state, municipal, or county law enforcement agencies that handled the investigation and prosecution all of the costs that the state, municipal corporation, or county reasonably incurred in having tests performed under section 2925.51 of the Revised Code or in any other manner on any substance that was the basis of, or involved in, the offense to determine whether the substance contained any amount of a controlled substance if the results of the tests indicate that the substance tested contained any controlled substance. No court shall order an offender under this section to pay the costs of tests performed on a substance if the results of the tests do not indicate that the substance tested contained any controlled substance.

The court shall hold a hearing to determine the amount of costs to be imposed under this section. The court may hold the hearing as part of the sentencing hearing for the offender.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3 cases, 2015–2019 · leading case: State v. Huffman, 2017 Ohio 4097 (Ohio Ct. App. 2017).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Huffman, 2017 Ohio 4097 (Ohio Ct. App. 2017). “After a presentence investigation, the trial court sentenced him to 11 months in prison, suspended his driver’s license for one year, ordered him to pay court costs of $257, and because the offense was a drug abuse offense, ordered him to pay $125 to the Troy 1 The record…”
State v. Barnett, 2019 Ohio 2313 (Ohio Ct. App. 2019). · cites it 6× “Barnett argues in his second Assignment of Error that the trial court was without authority to award restitution to the Mansfield Police Department Crime Lab for the cost of lab fees because the Mansfield Police Department Crime Lab is not a “victim.”
State v. Hewitt, 2015 Ohio 5489 (Ohio Ct. App. 2015). · cites it 4× “Effective October 12, 2006, R.C. 2925.511 authorizes a sentencing court to order an offender to reimburse law enforcement agencies for the costs of tests to identify the controlled substance at issue, so long as the tests come back positive.”
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.