Ohio Revised Code

Ohio Rev. Code § 2941.48 (2026)

Recognizance of witnesses for appearance at trial

✓ 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:

October 1, 1953

Latest Legislation:

House Bill 1 - 100th General Assembly

PDF:

Download Authenticated PDF

In any case pending in the court of common pleas, the court, either before or after indictment, may require any witness designated by the prosecuting attorney to enter into a recognizance, with or without surety, in such sum as the court thinks proper for his appearance to testify in such cause. A witness failing or refusing to comply with such order shall be committed to the county jail until he gives his testimony in such case or is ordered discharged by the court. If a witness is committed to jail upon order of court for want of such recognizance, he shall be paid while so confined like fees as are allowed witnesses by section 2335.08 of the Revised Code. The trial of such case has precedence over other cases and the court shall designate any early day for such trial.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 8 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1992–2024 · leading case: State v. Hollins, 2016-Ohio-5521.

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

State v. Hollins, 2016-Ohio-5521. · cites it 7× “{¶7} Accordingly, on October 26, 2015, the state filed a motion pursuant to R.C. 2941.48 for a material witness warrant regarding Bailey.”

Stone v. Holzberger, 807 F. Supp. 1325 (S.D. Ohio 1992). · cites it 7× “48 provides in part: In any case pending in the court of common pleas, the court, either before or after indictment, may require any witness designated by the prosecuting attorney to enter into a recognizance, with or without surety, in such sum as the court thinks proper for…”

State v. Rice, 2019-Ohio-1415. · cites it 2× “Suffice to say, the court was well within its power pursuant to R.C. 2941.48 to require Ms. Hudson to post bond since there was good reason to believe she would not appear to testify in Mr.”

State v. Eatmon, 2022-Ohio-1197, 201 N.E.3d 818. · cites it 6× “18 and R.C. 2941.48 provide mechanisms by which a trial court may secure the presence of a witness at a criminal trial— either by requiring the witness to provide surety or by ordering that the witness be SUPREME COURT OF OHIO detained until trial.”

State v. Eatmon, 2020-Ohio-3592. · cites it 2× “18; and R.C. 2941.48. R.C. 2937.16 “When witnesses shall be recognized to appear” provides: When an accused enters into a recognizance or is committed in default thereof, the judge or magistrate shall require such witnesses against the prisoner as he finds necessary, to enter…”

State v. Dunbar, 2020-Ohio-4568. “The trial court erred in denying motion to correct illegal sentence because said sentence is void as a matter of law, and is contrary to law because not [sic] findings were made on the record that appellant is a prior convicted violent offender, nor does he have a conviction for…”

State v. Kidd, 2021-Ohio-503. “18 and R.C. 2941.48, a material witness warrant may be issued to secure the presence and testimony of a witness at trial.”

State v. Kirks, 2024-Ohio-468. “18 and R.C. 2941.48, a material witness warrant may be issued to secure the presence and testimony of a witness at trial.”

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.