Ohio Rev. Code » Chapter 2943
Ohio Revised Code

Ohio Rev. Code § 2943.02 (2026)

Arraignment

✓ 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
 

An accused person shall be arraigned by the clerk of the court of common pleas, or his deputy, reading the indictment or information to the accused, unless the accused or his attorney waives the reading thereof. He shall then be asked to plead thereto. Arraignment shall be made immediately after the disposition of exceptions to the indictment, if any are filed, or, if no exceptions are filed, after reasonable opportunity has been given the accused to file such exceptions.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 7 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1956–2026 · leading case: Elston v. Howland Local Schs., 865 N.E.2d 845 (Ohio 2007).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Elston v. Howland Local Schs., 865 N.E.2d 845 (Ohio 2007). “As we explained in discussing R.C. 2943.02, a part of the Court of Claims Act in which *321 the state waived its immunity with respect to certain torts, “the state cannot be sued for its legislative or judicial functions or the exercise of an executive or planning function…”
State ex rel. Marbuery-Davis v. Cuyahoga Cty. Common Pleas Court, 2025-Ohio-2602. · cites it 3× “CR-15-596537-A and “to prevent any further prosecution in said case until the court and/or magistrate complies with R.C. 2943.02 and R.C. 2937.06(A).”1 For the following reasons, this court grants the respondents’ dispositive motion and dismisses the complaint for a writ of…”
State v. Ross, 2026-Ohio-1606. “10(A); R.C. 2943.02)). {¶ 25} In all these cases, Ohio courts have recognized a defendant's ability to waive rights or entitlements, even when a trial court has an affirmative obligation to provide those rights or entitlements to the defendant.”
State v. Powell, 2014-Ohio-719. “{¶8} In this case, the trial court dismissed the charges against Powell based upon the court’s erroneous presumption that a prosecuting witness was required to be present at Powell’s upcoming arraignment.”
In re Morelli, 148 N.E.2d 96 (Ohio Ct. App. 1956). “The Ohio statutes are silent as to the manner in which the plea shall be made, although §2943.02 R. C., permits counsel on behalf of the accused to waive the reading of the indictment, thereby recognizing the right of counsel to act for the accused when in his presence.”
Morgan v. Ohio State Univ. Coll. of Dentistry, 2013-Ohio-1513. “Julie Holloway was entitled to immunity pursuant to R.C. 2943.02(F) and 9.86. While this issue was not properly raised prior to trial, the court will dispose of it.”
Progressive Direct Ins. Co. v. Glancy, 2014-Ohio-3739. “14 against ODOT as a third-party defendant, and nothing in R.C. 2943.02 prevents such a filing. {¶ 16} Finally, ODOT contends that it cannot be liable for reimbursement of the insured's deductibles both in the present action and in separate lawsuits brought by the insured.”
Ohio Rev. Code § 2943.02(F): 1 case
Morgan v. Ohio State Univ. Coll. of Dentistry, 2013-Ohio-1513. “Julie Holloway was entitled to immunity pursuant to R.C. 2943.02(F) and 9.86. While this issue was not properly raised prior to trial, the court will dispose of it.”
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.