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

Ohio Rev. Code § 2951.08 (2026)

Conditions for arrest of person on probation or under community control sanction

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ORCcodes.ohio.gov (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
Effective:
September 30, 2011
Latest Legislation:
House Bill 86 - 129th General Assembly
PDF:
Download Authenticated PDF
 

(A) During a period of community control, any field officer or probation officer may arrest the person under a community control sanction without a warrant and bring the person before the judge or magistrate before whom the cause was pending. During a period of community control, any peace officer may arrest the person under a community control sanction without a warrant upon the written order of the chief probation officer of the probation agency if the person under a community control sanction is under the supervision of that probation agency or on the order of an officer of the adult parole authority created pursuant to section 5149.02 of the Revised Code if the person under a community control sanction is under the supervision of the authority. During a period of community control, any peace officer may arrest the person under a community control sanction on the warrant of the judge or magistrate before whom the cause was pending.

During a period of community control, any peace officer may arrest the person under a community control sanction without a warrant if the peace officer has reasonable ground to believe that the person has violated or is violating any of the following that is a condition of the person's community control sanction:

(1) A condition that prohibits ownership, possession, or use of a firearm, deadly weapon, ammunition, or dangerous ordnance;

(2) A condition that prohibits the person from being within a specified structure or geographic area;

(3) A condition that confines the person to a residence, facility, or other structure;

(4) A condition that prohibits the person from contacting or communicating with any specified individual;

(5) A condition that prohibits the person from associating with a specified individual;

(6) A condition as provided in division (A)(1)(a) of section 2929.25 of the Revised Code or in division (A)(1) of section 2929.15 or (A)(8) of section 2929.27 of the Revised Code that requires that the person not ingest or be injected with a drug of abuse and submit to random drug testing and requires that the results of the drug test indicate that the person did not ingest or was not injected with a drug of abuse.

(B) Within three business days after making an arrest under this section, the arresting field officer, probation officer, or peace officer or the department or agency of the arresting officer shall notify the chief probation officer or the chief probation officer's designee that the person has been arrested. Within thirty days of being notified that a field officer, probation officer, or peace officer has made an arrest under this section, the chief probation officer or designee, or another probation officer designated by the chief probation officer, promptly shall bring the person who was arrested before the judge or magistrate before whom the cause was pending.

(C) Nothing in this section limits the powers of arrest granted to certain law enforcement officers and citizens under sections 2935.03 and 2935.04 of the Revised Code.

(D) A probation officer shall receive the actual and necessary expenses incurred in the performance of the officer's duties.

(E) As used in this section, "random drug testing" has the same meaning as in section 5120.63 of the Revised Code.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 45 cases (6 in the last 5 years), 1957–2026 · leading case: City of Columbus v. Bickel, 601 N.E.2d 61 (Ohio Ct. App. 1991).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
City of Columbus v. Bickel, 601 N.E.2d 61 (Ohio Ct. App. 1991). · cites it 4× “Rather, it was a probation revocation proceeding, based on prior convictions in Franklin County Municipal Court, initiated by the probation department under R.C. 2951.08 and 2951.09. Those statutes specifically grant the sentencing court continuing jurisdiction to revoke a…”
State v. Shoaf, 746 N.E.2d 674 (Ohio Ct. App. 2000). · cites it 4× “at the offender has failed treatment, has failed to submit to or follow the prescribed treatment, or has become a discipline problem, if the offender does not satisfactorily complete the period of rehabilitation or the other conditions ordered by the court, or if the offender…”
State v. Jackson (Slip Opinion), 2018 Ohio 2169 (Ohio 2018). · cites it 2× “01(A)(11)—formerly R.C. 2901.01(K)—defines “law enforcement officer” to include an officer of the state with a statutory duty to enforce laws and authority to arrest violators and that R.”
State v. Thompson, 514 N.E.2d 407 (Ohio 1987). “* * Thus, a parole officer may arrest a parolee if the parole officer has reasonable cause to believe that the parolee has violated the conditions of his parole.”
State ex rel. Davis v. Janas (Slip Opinion), 2020 Ohio 1462 (Ohio 2020). “1 (motion to withdraw guilty plea); R.C. 2951.08 and Crim.R. 32.3 (probation-revocation proceedings); R.”
State v. McKnight, 462 N.E.2d 441 (Ohio Ct. App. 1983). · cites it 2× “09 provides in pertinent part as follows: “When a defendant on probation is brought before the judge or magistrate under section 2951.08 of the Revised Code, such judge or magistrate shall immediately inquire into the conduct of the defendant and may terminate the probation and…”
State v. McMullen, 452 N.E.2d 1292 (Ohio 1983). · cites it 2× “09 provides, in pertinent part, as follows: “When a defendant on probation is brought before the judge or magistrate under section 2951.08 of the Revised Code, such judge * * * may terminate the probation and impose any sentence which might originally have been imposed * * In…”
State v. Wells, 2013 Ohio 3722 (Ohio Ct. App. 2013). “Whether this inactivity violated Wells’s due process rights on the probation case, and thus affected the validity of the probation hold or capias, is not before this court because, again, Wells did not appeal his probation case.”
State v. Jones, 703 N.E.2d 833 (Ohio Ct. App. 1997). · cites it 3× “08, which provides: “(A) During a period of probation or community control, any field officer or probation officer may arrest the person on probation or under a community control sanction without a warrant and bring the person before the judge or magistrate before whom the cause…”
State v. Draper, 573 N.E.2d 602 (Ohio 1991). · cites it 2× “09 provided: “When a defendant on probation is brought before the judge or magistrate under section 2951.08 of the Revised Code, such judge or magistrate shall immediately inquire into the conduct of the defendant, and may terminate the probation and impose any sentence which…”
State v. Bleasdale, 590 N.E.2d 43 (Ohio Ct. App. 1990). · cites it 2× “04(F), it states: "*** If at any time after treatment has commenced, the treating facility or program reports to the probation officer that the offender fails to submit to or follow the prescribed treatment, or becomes a discipline problem, the offender shall be arrested as…”
State v. Miller, 2017 Ohio 5801 (Ohio Ct. App. 2017). · cites it 4× “2016 Arrest of Appellant {¶9} On July 20, 2016, shortly before the expiration of appellant’s community control period, Chief Probation Officer Estill filed with the Holmes County Clerk of Courts an order to arrest appellant pursuant to R.C. 2951.08, setting forth both of the…”
Show all 45 citing cases →
— Ohio Rev. Code § 2951.08(A) — 6 cases
State v. Miller, 2017 Ohio 5801 (Ohio Ct. App. 2017). “2016 Arrest of Appellant {¶9} On July 20, 2016, shortly before the expiration of appellant’s community control period, Chief Probation Officer Estill filed with the Holmes County Clerk of Courts an order to arrest appellant pursuant to R.C. 2951.08, setting forth both of the…”
State v. Ghast, 2024 Ohio 697 (Ohio Ct. App. 2024).
State v. Young, 798 N.E.2d 629 (Ohio Ct. App. 2003).
State v. Dawson, 2018 Ohio 2685 (Ohio Ct. App. 2018).
Portentoso v. Kern, 532 F. Supp. 2d 920 (N.D. Ohio 2008).
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.