Ohio Rev. Code » Chapter 2951 - Ohio Revised Code | Ohio Laws
Ohio Revised Code

Ohio Rev. Code § 2951.02 (2026)

Factors to consider when granting probation or suspending sentence

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ORCcodes.ohio.gov (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
Effective:
April 4, 2023
Latest Legislation:
Senate Bill 16, Senate Bill 288 - 134th General Assembly
PDF:
Download Authenticated PDF
 

(A)(1) During the period of a misdemeanor offender's community control sanction or during the period of a felony offender's nonresidential sanction, authorized probation officers who are engaged within the scope of their supervisory duties or responsibilities may search, with or without a warrant, the person of the offender, the place of residence of the offender, and a motor vehicle, another item of tangible or intangible personal property, or other real property in which the offender has a right, title, or interest or for which the offender has the express or implied permission of a person with a right, title, or interest to use, occupy, or possess if any of the following apply:

(a) The probation officers have reasonable grounds to believe that the offender is not abiding by the law or otherwise is not complying with the conditions of the misdemeanor offender's community control sanction or the conditions of the felony offender's nonresidential sanction.

(b) If the offender is a felony offender, the court requires the offender's consent to searches as part of the terms and conditions of community control, and the offender agreed to those terms and conditions.

(c) If the offender is a felony offender, the offender otherwise provides consent for the search.

(2) If a felony offender who is sentenced to a nonresidential sanction is under the general control and supervision of the adult parole authority, as described in division (A)(2)(a) of section 2929.15 of the Revised Code, adult parole authority field officers with supervisory responsibilities over the felony offender shall have the same search authority relative to the felony offender during the period of the sanction that is described under division (A)(1) of this section for probation officers.

(3) If a misdemeanor offender is placed under a community control sanction pursuant to section 2929.25 of the Revised Code or if a felony offender is sentenced to a nonresidential sanction pursuant to section 2929.17 of the Revised Code, the court that places the misdemeanor offender under the sanction or sentences the felony offender to the sanction shall provide the offender with a written notice that informs the offender that authorized probation officers or adult parole authority field officers with supervisory responsibilities over the offender who are engaged within the scope of their supervisory duties or responsibilities may conduct the types of searches described in divisions (A)(1) and (2) of this section during the period of community control sanction or the nonresidential sanction if any of the following apply:

(a) The officers have reasonable grounds to believe that the offender is not abiding by the law or otherwise is not complying with the conditions of the offender's community control sanction or nonresidential sanction.

(b) If the offender is a felony offender, the court requires the offender's consent to searches as part of the terms and conditions of community control, and the offender agreed to those terms and conditions.

(c) If the offender is a felony offender, the offender otherwise provides consent for the search.

(B) If an offender is convicted of or pleads guilty to a misdemeanor, the court may require the offender, as a condition of the offender's sentence of a community control sanction, to perform supervised community service work in accordance with this division. If an offender is convicted of or pleads guilty to a felony, the court, pursuant to sections 2929.15 and 2929.17 of the Revised Code, may impose a sanction that requires the offender to perform supervised community service work in accordance with this division. The supervised community service work shall be under the authority of health districts, park districts, counties, municipal corporations, townships, other political subdivisions of the state, or agencies of the state or any of its political subdivisions, or under the authority of charitable organizations that render services to the community or its citizens, in accordance with this division. The court may require an offender who is ordered to perform the work to pay to it a reasonable fee to cover the costs of the offender's participation in the work, including, but not limited to, the costs of procuring a policy or policies of liability insurance to cover the period during which the offender will perform the work.

A court may permit any offender convicted of a felony or a misdemeanor to satisfy the payment of a fine imposed for the offense pursuant to section 2929.18 or 2929.28 of the Revised Code by performing supervised community service work as described in this division if the offender requests an opportunity to satisfy the payment by this means and if the court determines that the offender is financially unable to pay the fine.

After imposing a term of community service, the court may modify the sentence to authorize a reasonable contribution to the appropriate general fund as provided in division (B) of section 2929.27 of the Revised Code.

The supervised community service work that may be imposed under this division shall be subject to the following limitations:

(1) The court shall fix the period of the work and, if necessary, shall distribute it over weekends or over other appropriate times that will allow the offender to continue at the offender's occupation or to care for the offender's family. The period of the work as fixed by the court shall not exceed in the aggregate the number of hours of community service imposed by the court pursuant to section 2929.17 or 2929.27 of the Revised Code.

(2) An agency, political subdivision, or charitable organization must agree to accept the offender for the work before the court requires the offender to perform the work for the entity. A court shall not require an offender to perform supervised community service work for an agency, political subdivision, or charitable organization at a location that is an unreasonable distance from the offender's residence or domicile, unless the offender is provided with transportation to the location where the work is to be performed.

(3) A court may enter into an agreement with a county department of job and family services for the management, placement, and supervision of offenders eligible for community service work in work activities, developmental activities, and alternative work activities under sections 5107.40 to 5107.69 of the Revised Code. If a court and a county department of job and family services have entered into an agreement of that nature, the clerk of that court is authorized to pay directly to the county department all or a portion of the fees collected by the court pursuant to this division in accordance with the terms of its agreement.

(4) Community service work that a court requires under this division shall be supervised by an official of the agency, political subdivision, or charitable organization for which the work is performed or by a person designated by the agency, political subdivision, or charitable organization. The official or designated person shall be qualified for the supervision by education, training, or experience, and periodically shall report, in writing, to the court and to the offender's probation officer concerning the conduct of the offender in performing the work.

(5) The total of any period of supervised community service work imposed on an offender under division (B) of this section plus the period of all other sanctions imposed pursuant to sections 2929.15, 2929.16, 2929.17, and 2929.18 of the Revised Code for a felony, or pursuant to sections 2929.25, 2929.26, 2929.27, and 2929.28 of the Revised Code for a misdemeanor, shall not exceed five years.

(C)(1) If an offender is convicted of a violation of section 4511.19 of the Revised Code or a substantially similar municipal ordinance, the court may require, as a condition of a community control sanction, that the offender operate only a motor vehicle equipped with an ignition interlock device that is certified pursuant to section 4510.43 of the Revised Code.

(2) If a court requires an offender, as a condition of a community control sanction pursuant to division (C)(1) of this section, to operate only a motor vehicle equipped with an ignition interlock device that is certified pursuant to section 4510.43 of the Revised Code, the offender immediately shall surrender the offender's driver's or commercial driver's license or permit to the court. Upon the receipt of the offender's license or permit, the court shall issue an order authorizing the offender to operate a motor vehicle equipped with a certified ignition interlock device and deliver the offender's license or permit to the registrar of motor vehicles. The court also shall give the offender a copy of its order for purposes of obtaining a restricted license.

(3) An offender shall present to the registrar or to a deputy registrar the copy of the order issued under division (C) of this section and a certificate affirming the installation of an ignition interlock device that is in a form established by the director of public safety and that is signed by the person who installed the device. Upon presentation of the order and certificate, the registrar or deputy registrar shall issue a restricted license to the offender, unless the offender's driver's license or commercial driver's license or permit is suspended under any other provision of law and limited driving privileges have not been granted with regard to that suspension. The restricted license shall be identical to the surrendered license, except that it shall have printed on its face a statement that the offender is prohibited from operating a motor vehicle that is not equipped with an ignition interlock device that is certified pursuant to section 4510.43 of the Revised Code. The registrar shall deliver the offender's surrendered license or permit to the court upon receipt of a court order requiring it to do so, or reissue the offender's license or permit under section 4510.52 of the Revised Code if the registrar destroyed the offender's license or permit under that section. The offender shall surrender the restricted license to the court upon receipt of the offender's surrendered license or permit.

(4) If an offender violates a requirement of the court imposed under division (C)(1) of this section, the court may impose a class seven suspension of the offender's driver's or commercial driver's license or permit or nonresident operating privilege from the range specified in division (A)(7) of section 4510.02 of the Revised Code. On a second or subsequent violation, the court may impose a class four suspension of the offender's driver's or commercial driver's license or permit or nonresident operating privilege from the range specified in division (A)(4) of section 4510.02 of the Revised Code.

Last updated February 7, 2023 at 9:51 AM

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 250 cases (27 in the last 5 years), 1954–2026 · leading case: State v. Butler, 538 N.E.2d 98 (Ohio 1989).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Butler, 538 N.E.2d 98 (Ohio 1989). · cites it 18× “Accordingly, we held that a person convicted of carrying a concealed weapon by virtue *176 of having a firearm concealed on his person is armed and shall not be placed on probation pursuant to R.C. 2951.02 (F)(3). Apparently in response to the Carter decision, the General…”
State v. Campbell, 2022 Ohio 3626 (Ohio 2022). · cites it 17× “02(A) permits probation officers to search the homes, automobiles, personal property, and the person of offenders under community-control supervision “with or without a warrant” if the officers “have reasonable grounds” to believe the offender is violating the law or conditions…”
State v. Smith, 537 N.E.2d 198 (Ohio 1989). · cites it 12× “of sentencing, if compliance with the procedures contained in division (C) of this section is not required by that division, and the time at which an offender is delivered into the custody of the institution in which he is to serve his sentence, when a term of imprisonment for…”
State v. Talty, 814 N.E.2d 1201 (Ohio 2004). · cites it 4× “15 with former R.C. 2951.02. The community-control statute, despite changing the manner in which probation was administered, did not change its underlying goals of rehabilitation, administering justice, and ensuring good behavior — notwithstanding the lack of explicit language…”
State v. Brandon, 621 N.E.2d 776 (Ohio Ct. App. 1993). · cites it 25× “51(A), which gives a trial court the right to suspend an offender’s sentence and place him on probation pursuant to the guidelines and prohibitions against probation contained in R.C. 2951.02. Therefore, appellant concedes that R.”
State v. Coffman, 742 N.E.2d 644 (Ohio 2001). · cites it 4× “061(B) provided: “Subject to sections 2951.02 to 2951.09 of the Revised Code and notwithstanding the expiration of the term of court during which the defendant was sentenced, the trial court, upon the motion of the defendant, may suspend the further execution of the defendant’s…”
City of Lakewood v. Davies, 519 N.E.2d 860 (Ohio Ct. App. 1987). · cites it 10× “” R.C. 2951.02, which deals with the criteria for granting probation, provides that, at a minimum, the offender shall abide by the law and not leave the state of Ohio without the court’s permission.”
State v. Jones, 550 N.E.2d 469 (Ohio 1990). · cites it 4× “Pursuant to R.C. 2951.02, the trial court is granted broad discretion in setting conditions of probation.”
State v. Simon, 721 N.E.2d 1041 (Ohio 2000). · cites it 5× “Former R.C. 2951.02 provided: “(F) An offender shall.”
City of Columbus v. Bickel, 601 N.E.2d 61 (Ohio Ct. App. 1991). · cites it 5× “The question specifically presented by appellant’s seventh assignment of error is whether the municipal court had subject matter jurisdiction to determine whether appellant violated the minimum statutory condition of probation contained in R.C. 2951.02(C) that he abide by the…”
State v. O'Shannon, 542 N.E.2d 693 (Ohio Ct. App. 1988). · cites it 9× “51 to modify a sentence and place a felony offender on probation pursuant to R.C. 2951.02. In so doing, the trial court, pursuant to R.”
State v. Consilio, 114 Ohio St. 3d 295 (Ohio 2007). · cites it 2× “15 with former R.C. 2951.02. 146 Ohio Laws, Part IV, 7136, 7546.”
Show all 250 citing cases →
— Ohio Rev. Code § 2951.02(1) — 3 cases
State v. Foureman, 587 N.E.2d 925 (Ohio Ct. App. 1990).
State v. Fourman, 4 Ohio App. Unrep. 541 (Ohio Ct. App. 1990).
Medina v. Papadelis, 2 Ohio App. Unrep. 490 (Ohio Ct. App. 1990).
— Ohio Rev. Code § 2951.02(A) — 25 cases
State v. Campbell, 2022 Ohio 3626 (Ohio 2022). “02(A) permits probation officers to search the homes, automobiles, personal property, and the person of offenders under community-control supervision “with or without a warrant” if the officers “have reasonable grounds” to believe the offender is violating the law or conditions…”
State v. Hayden, 2022 Ohio 3933 (Ohio Ct. App. 2022).
State v. Thames, 2022 Ohio 1715 (Ohio Ct. App. 2022).
State v. Gies, 2019 Ohio 4249 (Ohio Ct. App. 2019).
State v. Nelson, 2016 Ohio 5344 (Ohio Ct. App. 2016).
— Ohio Rev. Code § 2951.02(A)(1) — 3 cases
City of Lakewood v. Hartman, 714 N.E.2d 902 (Ohio 1999).
Lakewood v. Hartman, 1999 Ohio 101 (Ohio 1999).
State v. Walton, 738 N.E.2d 1258 (Ohio Ct. App. 2000).
— Ohio Rev. Code § 2951.02(A)(1)(a) — 4 cases
State v. Apple, 2024 Ohio 2286 (Ohio Ct. App. 2024).
State v. Thomas, 2024 Ohio 5662 (Ohio Ct. App. 2024).
State v. Currie, 2025 Ohio 670 (Ohio Ct. App. 2025).
N. Olmsted v. Donnelly, 2023 Ohio 3712 (Ohio Ct. App. 2023).
— Ohio Rev. Code § 2951.02(A)(1)(b) — 1 case
N. Olmsted v. Donnelly, 2023 Ohio 3712 (Ohio Ct. App. 2023).
— Ohio Rev. Code § 2951.02(A)(3) — 1 case
State v. Borger, 2023 Ohio 2025 (Ohio Ct. App. 2023).
— Ohio Rev. Code § 2951.02(B) — 6 cases
State v. Pruitt, 480 N.E.2d 499 (Ohio Ct. App. 1984).
State v. Wagner, 608 N.E.2d 852 (Ohio Ct. App. 1992).
State v. Qualls, 552 N.E.2d 957 (Ohio Ct. App. 1988).
State v. Shenefield, 702 N.E.2d 134 (Ohio Ct. App. 1997).
State v. Walker, 841 N.E.2d 376 (Ohio Ct. App. 2005).
— Ohio Rev. Code § 2951.02(B)(6) — 1 case
State v. Hummer, 668 N.E.2d 939 (Ohio Ct. App. 1995).
— Ohio Rev. Code § 2951.02(B)(7) — 1 case
State v. Hummer, 668 N.E.2d 939 (Ohio Ct. App. 1995).
— Ohio Rev. Code § 2951.02(B)(9) — 4 cases
State v. Shenefield, 702 N.E.2d 134 (Ohio Ct. App. 1997).
State v. Walker, 841 N.E.2d 376 (Ohio Ct. App. 2005).
State v. Boomershine, 619 N.E.2d 52 (Ohio Ct. App. 1993).
State v. Loesser, 659 N.E.2d 1287 (Ohio 1996).
— Ohio Rev. Code § 2951.02(C) — 54 cases
City of Columbus v. Bickel, 601 N.E.2d 61 (Ohio Ct. App. 1991). “The question specifically presented by appellant’s seventh assignment of error is whether the municipal court had subject matter jurisdiction to determine whether appellant violated the minimum statutory condition of probation contained in R.C. 2951.02(C) that he abide by the…”
State v. Jones, 550 N.E.2d 469 (Ohio 1990). “Pursuant to R.C. 2951.02, the trial court is granted broad discretion in setting conditions of probation.”
State v. Talty, 814 N.E.2d 1201 (Ohio 2004). “15 with former R.C. 2951.02. The community-control statute, despite changing the manner in which probation was administered, did not change its underlying goals of rehabilitation, administering justice, and ensuring good behavior — notwithstanding the lack of explicit language…”
State v. McLean, 622 N.E.2d 402 (Ohio Ct. App. 1993).
State v. Watkins, 644 N.E.2d 1049 (Ohio Ct. App. 1994).
— Ohio Rev. Code § 2951.02(C)(1)(a) — 5 cases
City of Lakewood v. Hartman, 714 N.E.2d 902 (Ohio 1999).
State v. Conkle, 717 N.E.2d 411 (Ohio Ct. App. 1998).
State v. Bybee, 731 N.E.2d 232 (Ohio Ct. App. 1999).
State v. Brillhart, 717 N.E.2d 413 (Ohio Ct. App. 1998).
Lakewood v. Hartman, 1999 Ohio 101 (Ohio 1999).
— Ohio Rev. Code § 2951.02(C)(1)(b) — 1 case
State v. Craig, 720 N.E.2d 966 (Ohio Ct. App. 1998).
— Ohio Rev. Code § 2951.02(F) — 29 cases
State v. Smith, 537 N.E.2d 198 (Ohio 1989). “of sentencing, if compliance with the procedures contained in division (C) of this section is not required by that division, and the time at which an offender is delivered into the custody of the institution in which he is to serve his sentence, when a term of imprisonment for…”
State v. Butler, 538 N.E.2d 98 (Ohio 1989). “Accordingly, we held that a person convicted of carrying a concealed weapon by virtue *176 of having a firearm concealed on his person is armed and shall not be placed on probation pursuant to R.C. 2951.02 (F)(3). Apparently in response to the Carter decision, the General…”
State v. Simon, 721 N.E.2d 1041 (Ohio 2000). “Former R.C. 2951.02 provided: “(F) An offender shall.”
State v. Patterson, 673 N.E.2d 1001 (Ohio Ct. App. 1996).
State v. Brandon, 621 N.E.2d 776 (Ohio Ct. App. 1993). “51(A), which gives a trial court the right to suspend an offender’s sentence and place him on probation pursuant to the guidelines and prohibitions against probation contained in R.C. 2951.02. Therefore, appellant concedes that R.”
— Ohio Rev. Code § 2951.02(F)(1) — 3 cases
State v. Arrington, 470 N.E.2d 211 (Ohio Ct. App. 1984).
State v. Walton, 738 N.E.2d 1258 (Ohio Ct. App. 2000).
City of Cleveland v. King, 794 N.E.2d 88 (Ohio Ct. App. 2003).
— Ohio Rev. Code § 2951.02(F)(1)(a) — 1 case
State v. Shelton, 844 N.E.2d 1256 (Ohio Ct. App. 2006).
— Ohio Rev. Code § 2951.02(F)(2) — 3 cases
State v. Walton, 738 N.E.2d 1258 (Ohio Ct. App. 2000).
State v. Shelton, 844 N.E.2d 1256 (Ohio Ct. App. 2006).
State v. Smith, 507 N.E.2d 1161 (Ohio Ct. App. 1986).
— Ohio Rev. Code § 2951.02(F)(3) — 26 cases
State v. Butler, 538 N.E.2d 98 (Ohio 1989). “Accordingly, we held that a person convicted of carrying a concealed weapon by virtue *176 of having a firearm concealed on his person is armed and shall not be placed on probation pursuant to R.C. 2951.02 (F)(3). Apparently in response to the Carter decision, the General…”
State v. Brandon, 621 N.E.2d 776 (Ohio Ct. App. 1993). “51(A), which gives a trial court the right to suspend an offender’s sentence and place him on probation pursuant to the guidelines and prohibitions against probation contained in R.C. 2951.02. Therefore, appellant concedes that R.”
State v. Carter, 444 N.E.2d 1334 (Ohio 1983).
State v. Barnett, 721 N.E.2d 1106 (Ohio Ct. App. 1999).
State v. Moore, 510 N.E.2d 825 (Ohio Ct. App. 1986).
— Ohio Rev. Code § 2951.02(F)(4) — 6 cases
State v. Cyrus, 586 N.E.2d 94 (Ohio 1992).
State v. Murnahan, 689 N.E.2d 1021 (Ohio Ct. App. 1996).
State v. Singh, 764 N.E.2d 1096 (Ohio Ct. App. 2001).
State v. Powell, 2019 Ohio 3005 (Ohio Ct. App. 2019).
State v. Eaton, 2019 Ohio 2998 (Ohio Ct. App. 2019).
— Ohio Rev. Code § 2951.02(F)(5) — 4 cases
State v. Smith, 537 N.E.2d 198 (Ohio 1989). “of sentencing, if compliance with the procedures contained in division (C) of this section is not required by that division, and the time at which an offender is delivered into the custody of the institution in which he is to serve his sentence, when a term of imprisonment for…”
State v. Leers, 617 N.E.2d 754 (Ohio Ct. App. 1992).
State v. Reid, 583 N.E.2d 1336 (Ohio Ct. App. 1989).
State v. Sparks, 584 N.E.2d 45 (Ohio Ct. App. 1990).
— Ohio Rev. Code § 2951.02(FX3) — 2 cases
State v. Johnson, 4 Ohio App. Unrep. 483 (Ohio Ct. App. 1990).
State v. Knox, 8 Ohio App. Unrep. 581 (Ohio Ct. App. 1990).
— Ohio Rev. Code § 2951.02(FX4) — 1 case
State v. Long, 589 N.E.2d 437 (Ohio Ct. App. 1990).
— Ohio Rev. Code § 2951.02(FX5) — 1 case
State v. Ibarra, 1 Ohio App. Unrep. 305 (Ohio Ct. App. 1990).
— Ohio Rev. Code § 2951.02(H) — 4 cases
Repub.-Franklin Ins. v. City of Amherst, 553 N.E.2d 614 (Ohio 1990).
City of Cleveland v. Anderson, 611 N.E.2d 439 (Ohio Ct. App. 1992).
State v. Walton, 738 N.E.2d 1258 (Ohio Ct. App. 2000).
Medina v. Papadelis, 2 Ohio App. Unrep. 490 (Ohio Ct. App. 1990).
— Ohio Rev. Code § 2951.02(H)(1) — 3 cases
State v. Rowland, 674 N.E.2d 1219 (Ohio Ct. App. 1996).
City of Cleveland v. King, 794 N.E.2d 88 (Ohio Ct. App. 2003).
City of Columbus v. Todd, 600 N.E.2d 727 (Ohio Ct. App. 1991).
— Ohio Rev. Code § 2951.02(H)(1)(a) — 3 cases
State v. Braggs, 2013 Ohio 3364 (Ohio Ct. App. 2013).
State v. Rowland, 674 N.E.2d 1219 (Ohio Ct. App. 1996).
City of Columbus v. Todd, 600 N.E.2d 727 (Ohio Ct. App. 1991).
— Ohio Rev. Code § 2951.02(H)(1)(b) — 1 case
State v. Rowland, 674 N.E.2d 1219 (Ohio Ct. App. 1996).
— Ohio Rev. Code § 2951.02(H)(2) — 1 case
State v. Rowland, 674 N.E.2d 1219 (Ohio Ct. App. 1996).
— Ohio Rev. Code § 2951.02(I)(1) — 1 case
State v. Foureman, 587 N.E.2d 925 (Ohio Ct. App. 1990).
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.