Ohio Rev. Code » Chapter 2950 - Ohio Revised Code | Ohio Laws
Ohio Revised Code

Ohio Rev. Code § 2950.02 (2026)

Exchange or release of relevant information about sexual predators and habitual sex offenders

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ORCcodes.ohio.gov (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
Effective:
January 1, 2008
Latest Legislation:
Senate Bill 10 - 127th General Assembly
PDF:
Download Authenticated PDF
 

(A) The general assembly hereby determines and declares that it recognizes and finds all of the following:

(1) If the public is provided adequate notice and information about offenders and delinquent children who commit sexually oriented offenses or who commit child-victim oriented offenses, members of the public and communities can develop constructive plans to prepare themselves and their children for the offender's or delinquent child's release from imprisonment, a prison term, or other confinement or detention. This allows members of the public and communities to meet with members of law enforcement agencies to prepare and obtain information about the rights and responsibilities of the public and the communities and to provide education and counseling to their children.

(2) Sex offenders and child-victim offenders pose a risk of engaging in further sexually abusive behavior even after being released from imprisonment, a prison term, or other confinement or detention, and protection of members of the public from sex offenders and child-victim offenders is a paramount governmental interest.

(3) The penal, juvenile, and mental health components of the justice system of this state are largely hidden from public view, and a lack of information from any component may result in the failure of the system to satisfy this paramount governmental interest of public safety described in division (A)(2) of this section.

(4) Overly restrictive confidentiality and liability laws governing the release of information about sex offenders and child-victim offenders have reduced the willingness to release information that could be appropriately released under the public disclosure laws and have increased risks of public safety.

(5) A person who is found to be a sex offender or a child-victim offender has a reduced expectation of privacy because of the public's interest in public safety and in the effective operation of government.

(6) The release of information about sex offenders and child-victim offenders to public agencies and the general public will further the governmental interests of public safety and public scrutiny of the criminal, juvenile, and mental health systems as long as the information released is rationally related to the furtherance of those goals.

(B) The general assembly hereby declares that, in providing in this chapter for registration regarding offenders and certain delinquent children who have committed sexually oriented offenses or who have committed child-victim oriented offenses and for community notification regarding tier III sex offenders/child-victim offenders who are criminal offenders, public registry-qualified juvenile offender registrants, and certain other juvenile offender registrants who are about to be or have been released from imprisonment, a prison term, or other confinement or detention and who will live in or near a particular neighborhood or who otherwise will live in or near a particular neighborhood, it is the general assembly's intent to protect the safety and general welfare of the people of this state. The general assembly further declares that it is the policy of this state to require the exchange in accordance with this chapter of relevant information about sex offenders and child-victim offenders among public agencies and officials and to authorize the release in accordance with this chapter of necessary and relevant information about sex offenders and child-victim offenders to members of the general public as a means of assuring public protection and that the exchange or release of that information is not punitive.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 72 cases (7 in the last 5 years), 1989–2026 · leading case: State v. Cook, 700 N.E.2d 570 (Ohio 1998).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Cook, 700 N.E.2d 570 (Ohio 1998). · cites it 8× “Former R.C. 2950.02. Only the frequency and duration of the registration requirements have changed.”
State v. Ferguson, 896 N.E.2d 110 (Ohio 2008). · cites it 8× “02 sets forth the legislative findings and public policy declaration of the General Assembly, which maintained prior findings that by providing adequate notice and information about offenders who commit sexually oriented offenses, the public “can develop constructive plans to…”
State v. Cook, 1998 Ohio 291 (Ohio 1998). · cites it 8× “Former R.C. 2950.02. Only the frequency and duration of the registration requirements have changed.”
State v. Williams, 2011 OH 3374 (Ohio 2011). · cites it 4× “02(B), in light of its determination that "[s]ex offenders and child-victim offenders pose a risk of engaging in further sexually abusive behavior even after being released from * * * confinement," R.C. 2950.02(A)(2). The General Assembly's legislative finding that…”
State v. Small, 833 N.E.2d 774 (Ohio Ct. App. 2005). · cites it 6× “2d 342 ; R.C. 2950.02. *385 {¶ 25} Based upon Cook, Williams, and the plain language of R.”
State v. Williams, 88 Ohio St. 3d 513 (Ohio 2000). · cites it 4× “R.C. 2950.02(A)(1). Dissemination of information is deemed to be justified because sexual predators and habitual sex offenders pose a high risk of recidivism, and protection of the public from these types of sex offenders is of “paramount governmental interest.”
State v. Blankenship (Slip Opinion), 2015 Ohio 4624 (Ohio 2015). · cites it 6× “02(B), in light of its determination that “[s]ex offenders and child-victim offenders pose a risk of engaging in further 24 January Term, 2015 sexually abusive behavior even after being released from * * * confinement,” R.C. 2950.02(A)(2). From the General Assembly’s decision to…”
State v. Buttery (Slip Opinion), 2020 Ohio 2998 (Ohio 2020). · cites it 3× “In R.C. 2950.02, the General Assembly sets forth its reasoning for requiring registration for juvenile offenders and others: (A) The general assembly hereby determines and declares that it recognizes and finds all of the following: *** (2) Sex offenders and child-victim…”
State v. Worthy, 2000 Ohio 428 (Ohio 2000). · cites it 5× “R.C. 2950.02(A)(1). Dissemination of information is deemed to be justified because sexual predators and habitual sex offenders pose a high risk of recidivism, and protection of the public from these types of sex offenders is of “paramount governmental interest.”
State v. Ward, 720 N.E.2d 603 (Ohio Ct. App. 1999). · cites it 4× “02, the General Assembly made the following declaration concerning its intent in passing the sexual predator law: “(A) The general assembly hereby determines and declares that it recognizes and finds all of the following: “(1) If the public is provided adequate notice and…”
State v. Hayden, 96 Ohio St. 3d 211 (Ohio 2002). · cites it 2× “However, before the community notification requirement is imposed, the law requires that a hearing be held either before sentencing or *214 before an incarcerated sex offender is released to determine whether that person should be labeled a sexual predator or habitual sex…”
State v. Hayden, 2002 Ohio 4169 (Ohio 2002). · cites it 2× “{¶10} Recognizing that sexual predators and habitual sex offenders have a high risk of recidivism, R.C. 2950.02(A)(2), the law allows in certain cases for the 1.”
Show all 72 citing cases →
— Ohio Rev. Code § 2950.02(A) — 7 cases
State v. Cook, 700 N.E.2d 570 (Ohio 1998). “Former R.C. 2950.02. Only the frequency and duration of the registration requirements have changed.”
State v. Cook, 1998 Ohio 291 (Ohio 1998). “Former R.C. 2950.02. Only the frequency and duration of the registration requirements have changed.”
State v. Ward, 720 N.E.2d 603 (Ohio Ct. App. 1999). “02, the General Assembly made the following declaration concerning its intent in passing the sexual predator law: “(A) The general assembly hereby determines and declares that it recognizes and finds all of the following: “(1) If the public is provided adequate notice and…”
State v. Lee, 716 N.E.2d 751 (Ohio Ct. App. 1998).
State v. Williams, 902 N.E.2d 1042 (Ohio Ct. App. 2008).
— Ohio Rev. Code § 2950.02(A)(1) — 17 cases
State v. Cook, 700 N.E.2d 570 (Ohio 1998). “Former R.C. 2950.02. Only the frequency and duration of the registration requirements have changed.”
State v. Ferguson, 896 N.E.2d 110 (Ohio 2008). “02 sets forth the legislative findings and public policy declaration of the General Assembly, which maintained prior findings that by providing adequate notice and information about offenders who commit sexually oriented offenses, the public “can develop constructive plans to…”
State v. Williams, 88 Ohio St. 3d 513 (Ohio 2000). “R.C. 2950.02(A)(1). Dissemination of information is deemed to be justified because sexual predators and habitual sex offenders pose a high risk of recidivism, and protection of the public from these types of sex offenders is of “paramount governmental interest.”
State v. Cook, 1998 Ohio 291 (Ohio 1998). “Former R.C. 2950.02. Only the frequency and duration of the registration requirements have changed.”
State v. Small, 833 N.E.2d 774 (Ohio Ct. App. 2005). “2d 342 ; R.C. 2950.02. *385 {¶ 25} Based upon Cook, Williams, and the plain language of R.”
— Ohio Rev. Code § 2950.02(A)(2) — 27 cases
State v. Williams, 2011 OH 3374 (Ohio 2011). “02(B), in light of its determination that "[s]ex offenders and child-victim offenders pose a risk of engaging in further sexually abusive behavior even after being released from * * * confinement," R.C. 2950.02(A)(2). The General Assembly's legislative finding that…”
State v. Cook, 700 N.E.2d 570 (Ohio 1998). “Former R.C. 2950.02. Only the frequency and duration of the registration requirements have changed.”
State v. Ferguson, 896 N.E.2d 110 (Ohio 2008). “02 sets forth the legislative findings and public policy declaration of the General Assembly, which maintained prior findings that by providing adequate notice and information about offenders who commit sexually oriented offenses, the public “can develop constructive plans to…”
Hyle v. Porter, 117 Ohio St. 3d 165 (Ohio 2008).
State v. Cook, 1998 Ohio 291 (Ohio 1998). “Former R.C. 2950.02. Only the frequency and duration of the registration requirements have changed.”
— Ohio Rev. Code § 2950.02(A)(4) — 1 case
State v. Ferguson, 896 N.E.2d 110 (Ohio 2008). “02 sets forth the legislative findings and public policy declaration of the General Assembly, which maintained prior findings that by providing adequate notice and information about offenders who commit sexually oriented offenses, the public “can develop constructive plans to…”
— Ohio Rev. Code § 2950.02(A)(5) — 6 cases
State v. Cook, 700 N.E.2d 570 (Ohio 1998). “Former R.C. 2950.02. Only the frequency and duration of the registration requirements have changed.”
State v. Ferguson, 896 N.E.2d 110 (Ohio 2008). “02 sets forth the legislative findings and public policy declaration of the General Assembly, which maintained prior findings that by providing adequate notice and information about offenders who commit sexually oriented offenses, the public “can develop constructive plans to…”
State v. Williams, 88 Ohio St. 3d 513 (Ohio 2000). “R.C. 2950.02(A)(1). Dissemination of information is deemed to be justified because sexual predators and habitual sex offenders pose a high risk of recidivism, and protection of the public from these types of sex offenders is of “paramount governmental interest.”
State v. Cook, 1998 Ohio 291 (Ohio 1998). “Former R.C. 2950.02. Only the frequency and duration of the registration requirements have changed.”
State v. Small, 833 N.E.2d 774 (Ohio Ct. App. 2005). “2d 342 ; R.C. 2950.02. *385 {¶ 25} Based upon Cook, Williams, and the plain language of R.”
— Ohio Rev. Code § 2950.02(A)(6) — 2 cases
State v. McConville, 2010 Ohio 958 (Ohio 2010).
In re R.M., 2014 Ohio 1200 (Ohio Ct. App. 2014).
— Ohio Rev. Code § 2950.02(B) — 38 cases
State v. Williams, 2011 OH 3374 (Ohio 2011). “02(B), in light of its determination that "[s]ex offenders and child-victim offenders pose a risk of engaging in further sexually abusive behavior even after being released from * * * confinement," R.C. 2950.02(A)(2). The General Assembly's legislative finding that…”
State v. Cook, 700 N.E.2d 570 (Ohio 1998). “Former R.C. 2950.02. Only the frequency and duration of the registration requirements have changed.”
State v. Blankenship (Slip Opinion), 2015 Ohio 4624 (Ohio 2015). “02(B), in light of its determination that “[s]ex offenders and child-victim offenders pose a risk of engaging in further 24 January Term, 2015 sexually abusive behavior even after being released from * * * confinement,” R.C. 2950.02(A)(2). From the General Assembly’s decision to…”
State v. Ferguson, 896 N.E.2d 110 (Ohio 2008). “02 sets forth the legislative findings and public policy declaration of the General Assembly, which maintained prior findings that by providing adequate notice and information about offenders who commit sexually oriented offenses, the public “can develop constructive plans to…”
In re C.P., 2012 Ohio 1446 (Ohio 2012).
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.