(A) As used in this section, "person living as a spouse" means a person who is living or has lived with the defendant in a common law marital relationship, who otherwise is cohabiting with the defendant, or who otherwise has cohabited with the defendant within five years prior to the date of the alleged commission of the act in question.
(B) The notice required under division (C) of this section shall be provided to a defendant when the alleged victim is any of the following:
(1) A spouse, person living as a spouse, or former spouse of the defendant;
(2) A parent or child of the defendant;
(3) A parent or child of a spouse, person living as a spouse, or former spouse of the defendant;
(4) The natural parent of any child of whom the defendant is the other natural or putative natural parent.
(C) Prior to accepting a guilty plea or plea of no contest to an indictment, information, or complaint that charges a person with a misdemeanor offense of violence, the court shall inform the defendant either personally or in writing that under 18 U.S.C. 922(g)(9) it may be unlawful for the person to ship, transport, purchase, or possess a firearm or ammunition as a result of any conviction for a misdemeanor offense of violence. The plea may not be vacated based on a failure to inform the person so charged regarding the restrictions under 18 U.S.C. 922(g)(9).
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 9
cases (4 in the last 5 years), 2012–2026 · leading case: State v. Poppel, 2021 Ohio 2536 (Ohio Ct. App. 2021).
State v. Poppel, 2021 Ohio 2536 (Ohio Ct. App. 2021). · cites it 10דSecond, positing that R.C. 2943.033(C) is unconstitutional, Poppel argues that the trial court, which likewise failed to advise him about the implications of his plea pursuant to 18 U.”
State v. Taylor, 2012 Ohio 963 (Ohio Ct. App. 2012). · cites it 8ד{¶ 4} The following day, the trial court brought Taylor back to inform him that the court had failed to advise him, as required by R.C. 2943.033(C), that 18 U.S.C. 922(g)(9) would impose firearm restrictions upon him as a result of his conviction.”
State v. Elkins, 2024 Ohio 1314 (Ohio Ct. App. 2024). · cites it 2דAt most, the trial court followed the requirements of R.C. 2943.033, which provides that prior to accepting a guilty plea or plea of no contest to a misdemeanor offense of violence, the court shall inform the defendant personally or in writing that under 18 U.”
State v. Henderson, 2015 Ohio 4408 (Ohio Ct. App. 2015). “R.C. 2943.033, relating to misdemeanor domestic violence convictions, requires that a court inform a defendant that under 18 U.”
Beavercreek v. Kelly, 2017 Ohio 8761 (Ohio Ct. App. 2017). · cites it 4דDuring the hearing, the trial court failed to inform Taylor, as required by R.C. 2943.033(C), that 18 U.S.C. 922(g)(9) (the Lautenberg Amendment) would impose firearm restrictions on him as a result of the conviction.”
State v. Cisler, 2016 Ohio 5016 (Ohio Ct. App. 2016). · cites it 3דHe argues he “may” lose his second amendment right to keep and bear arms.”
State v. Guy, 2017 Ohio 7006 (Ohio Ct. App. 2017). · cites it 2ד1 1 Appellant also challenges the constitutionality of R.C. 2943.033, which provides, in relevant part: 5.”
State v. Hunt, 2021 Ohio 1440 (Ohio Ct. App. 2021). “We further observed that R.C. 2943.033, relating to misdemeanor domestic violence convictions, requires that a court inform a defendant that under 18 U.”
Shaker Hts. v. Thompson (Ohio Ct. App. 2026). “As for the firearms disability, appellant’s arguments are foreclosed by R.C. 2943.033(C). That statute provides, in pertinent part, that a “plea may not be vacated based on a failure to inform the person so charged regarding” federal firearm restrictions.”
— Ohio Rev. Code § 2943.033(C) — 6 cases
State v. Poppel, 2021 Ohio 2536 (Ohio Ct. App. 2021). “Second, positing that R.C. 2943.033(C) is unconstitutional, Poppel argues that the trial court, which likewise failed to advise him about the implications of his plea pursuant to 18 U.”
State v. Taylor, 2012 Ohio 963 (Ohio Ct. App. 2012). “{¶ 4} The following day, the trial court brought Taylor back to inform him that the court had failed to advise him, as required by R.C. 2943.033(C), that 18 U.S.C. 922(g)(9) would impose firearm restrictions upon him as a result of his conviction.”
State v. Elkins, 2024 Ohio 1314 (Ohio Ct. App. 2024). “At most, the trial court followed the requirements of R.C. 2943.033, which provides that prior to accepting a guilty plea or plea of no contest to a misdemeanor offense of violence, the court shall inform the defendant personally or in writing that under 18 U.”
Beavercreek v. Kelly, 2017 Ohio 8761 (Ohio Ct. App. 2017). “During the hearing, the trial court failed to inform Taylor, as required by R.C. 2943.033(C), that 18 U.S.C. 922(g)(9) (the Lautenberg Amendment) would impose firearm restrictions on him as a result of the conviction.”
State v. Cisler, 2016 Ohio 5016 (Ohio Ct. App. 2016). “He argues he “may” lose his second amendment right to keep and bear arms.”
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.