Ohio Rev. Code » Chapter 2929
Ohio Revised Code

Ohio Rev. Code § 2929.024 (2026)

Investigation services and experts for indigent defendant

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ORCcodes.ohio.gov (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
Effective:
April 12, 2021
Latest Legislation:
House Bill 136 - 133rd General Assembly
PDF:
Download Authenticated PDF
 

(A) In a case described in division (B) of this section, if the court determines that investigation services, experts, or other services are reasonably necessary for the proper representation of a defendant charged with aggravated murder at trial or at the sentencing hearing, the court shall authorize the defendant's counsel to obtain the necessary services for the defendant, and shall order that payment of the fees and expenses for the necessary services be made in the same manner that payment for appointed counsel is made pursuant to Chapter 120. of the Revised Code. If the court determines that the necessary services had to be obtained prior to court authorization for payment of the fees and expenses for the necessary services, the court may, after the services have been obtained, authorize the defendant's counsel to obtain the necessary services and order that payment of the fees and expenses for the necessary services be made as provided in this section.

(B) Division (A) of this section applies in a case in which either of the following apply:

(1) The court determines that the defendant is indigent.

(2) The defendant is described in division (C) of section 2929.025 of the Revised Code and raises the matter of the defendant's serious mental illness at the time of the alleged commission of the aggravated murder as described in that division.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 67 cases (4 in the last 5 years), 1984–2024 · leading case: State v. Esparza, 529 N.E.2d 192 (Ohio 1988).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Esparza, 529 N.E.2d 192 (Ohio 1988). · cites it 11× “He also argues that the trial court erred in denying his request under R.C. 2929.024 for an independent psychologist to perform the mental examination, and that it erred in denying his requested continuance.”
State v. Jenkins, 473 N.E.2d 264 (Ohio 1984). · cites it 5× “Appellant, an indigent, argues that the denial of funding for expert assistance was in violation of R.C. 2929.024 and amounted to a denial of his right to effective assistance of counsel guaranteed by the Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution and Section 10, Article…”
State v. Ford (Slip Opinion), 2019 Ohio 4539 (Ohio 2019). · cites it 4× “Stankowski’s assistance was requested under R.C. 2929.024, they could have gotten her report to the jury while avoiding the R.”
State v. Broom, 533 N.E.2d 682 (Ohio 1988). · cites it 4× “In addition, appellant claims the trial court misapplied the “reasonably necessary” standard in R.C. 2929.024, which requires the court to order the state to pay for “reasonably necessary” services.”
State v. Bradley, 538 N.E.2d 373 (Ohio 1989). · cites it 2× “mitigation hearing a mere few hours after the completion of the psychological examination and permitted only three days for completion of the psychological examination in violation of appellant’s rights as guaranteed by the Fifth, Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United…”
State v. Maxwell, 2014 Ohio 1019 (Ohio 2014). · cites it 2× “Moreover, R.C. 2929.024 requires the trial court to provide expert assistance when “reasonably necessary for the proper representation of a defendant charged with aggravated murder.”
State v. Landrum, 559 N.E.2d 710 (Ohio 1990). · cites it 2× “R.C. 2929.024. See, also, State v. Jenkins (1984), 15 Ohio St.”
State v. Jamison, 552 N.E.2d 180 (Ohio 1990). · cites it 2× “Within Ohio, R.C. 2929.024 specifies procedures for indigents in capital cases to secure investigative services and experts.”
State v. Leonard, 104 Ohio St. 3d 54 (Ohio 2004). “{¶ 26} R.C. 2929.024 requires the trial court to grant funds in aggravated murder cases for investigative services and experts when “reasonably necessary for the proper representation” of indigent defendants.”
State v. McNeill, 1998 Ohio 293 (Ohio 1998). · cites it 4× “024 authorizes expert assistance only if the court determines the requested assistance is “reasonably necessary for the proper representation of [the] defendant.”
Van Hook v. Anderson, 127 F. Supp. 2d 899 (S.D. Ohio 2001). · cites it 2× “The failure of Van Hook’s trial attorneys to interview all of the witnesses listed in the prosecution’s discovery list, and to request the appointment of a criminal investigator as authorized under R.C. § 2929.024, prevented counsel from learning that Ronald Light initially…”
State v. Allen, 653 N.E.2d 675 (Ohio 1995). · cites it 2× “” In considering Allen’s assertion that a neurologist should have been appointed, we look to R.C. 2929.024, which entitles an indigent defendant charged with aggravated murder to such “investigation services, experts, or other services” as the trial court finds “reasonably…”
Show all 67 citing cases →
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.