Ohio Rev. Code » Chapter 955
Ohio Revised Code

Ohio Rev. Code § 955.21 (2026)

Requirement to properly confine or restrain a dog

✓ 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:
March 20, 2026
Latest Legislation:
House Bill 247 - 136th General Assembly
PDF:
Download Authenticated PDF
 

(A) Except as provided in division (F) of this section, no owner, keeper, or harborer of any dog shall fail at any time to do either of the following:

(1) Keep the dog physically confined or restrained upon the premises of the owner, keeper, or harborer by a leash, tether, adequate fence, supervision, or secure enclosure to prevent escape;

(2) Keep the dog under the reasonable control of some person.

A violation of division (A) of this section is a strict liability offense and section 2901.20 of the Revised Code does not apply.

(B) Whoever commits a violation of this section that involves a dog that is not a nuisance dog, dangerous dog, or vicious dog shall be fined not less than twenty-five dollars or more than one hundred dollars on a first offense, and on each subsequent offense shall be fined not less than seventy-five dollars or more than two hundred fifty dollars and may be imprisoned for not more than thirty days. Additionally, the court may order the offender to personally supervise the dog that the offender owns, keeps, or harbors, to cause that dog to complete dog obedience training, or to do both.

(C) Whoever commits a violation of this section that involves a nuisance dog is guilty of a misdemeanor of the fourth degree on the first offense and of a misdemeanor of the third degree on each subsequent offense involving the same dog. Additionally, the court may order the offender to personally supervise the nuisance dog that the offender owns, keeps, or harbors, to cause that dog to complete dog obedience training, or to do both.

(D) Whoever commits a violation of this section that involves a dangerous dog is guilty of a misdemeanor of the third degree on a first offense and of a misdemeanor of the second degree on each subsequent offense. Additionally, the court may order the offender to do either or both of the following:

(1) Personally supervise the dangerous dog that the offender owns, keeps, or harbors;

(2) Cause that dog to complete dog obedience training.

The court, in the alternative, may order the dangerous dog to be humanely destroyed by a licensed veterinarian or the county dog warden at the owner's expense.

Until the court makes a final determination and during the pendency of any appeal and at the discretion of the dog warden, the dog shall be confined or restrained in accordance with division (A) of section 955.24 of the Revised Code or at the county dog pound at the owner's expense.

(E) Whoever commits a violation of this section that involves a vicious dog is guilty of a misdemeanor of the second degree on a first offense and of a misdemeanor of the first degree on each subsequent offense. Additionally, the court shall order the offender to do both of the following:

(1) Personally supervise the vicious dog that the offender owns, keeps, or harbors;

(2) Cause that dog to complete dog obedience training.

The court, in the alternative, may order the vicious dog to be humanely destroyed by a licensed veterinarian or the county dog warden at the owner's expense.

Until the court makes a final determination and during the pendency of any appeal and at the discretion of the dog warden, the dog shall be confined or restrained in accordance with division (A) of section 955.24 of the Revised Code or at the county dog pound at the owner's expense.

(F) Division (A) of this section does not apply when a dog that has not been designated as a dangerous or vicious dog is lawfully engaged in either of the following:

(1) Hunting, provided the dog is accompanied by the owner, keeper, harborer, or handler of the dog;

(2) Field trials.

Last updated March 23, 2026 at 9:39 PM

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 13 cases (4 in the last 5 years), 1983–2024 · leading case: State v. Harding, 2023-Ohio-3508, 225 N.E.3d 1202.
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Harding, 2023-Ohio-3508, 225 N.E.3d 1202. · cites it 4× “01, a misdemeanor of the second degree; and failure to register a dog in violation of R.C. 955.21, a minor misdemeanor. Harding pled not guilty to all of the charges and the matter proceeded to a bench trial.”
State v. Nichols, 702 N.E.2d 504 (Ohio Ct. App. 6th Dist. 1997). · cites it 2× “Nichols, guilty of failing to file an application for registration of a dog in violation of R.C. 955.21 and guilty of failing to confine a dangerous dog in violation of R.”
State v. Nolan, 2016-Ohio-2985. · cites it 2× “99 provides for penalties corresponding to the offense and states as follows: (E)(1) Whoever violates section 955.21 of the Revised Code, violates division (B) of section 955.”
Schneider v. Kumpf, 2016-Ohio-5161, 58 N.E.3d 1220. · cites it 6× “10, R.C. 955.21, and R.C. 955.22(C). {¶ 13} On May 21, 2013, Richey called to report the dogs were loose again and had chased her.”
State v. Walker, 841 N.E.2d 376 (Ohio Ct. App. 2d Dist. 2005). · cites it 2× “99(E) provided: {¶ 33} “(1) Whoever violates section 955.21 or division (B) or (C) of section 955.”
Columbus v. Davis, 2021-Ohio-2114. · cites it 16× “2019 ERB 71477 (docketed on appeal as 19AP-719) with two counts of failure to register and pay for a dog license in violation of R.C. 955.21, and two counts of violating a rabies quarantine order in violation of R.”
State v. Hoerig, 907 N.E.2d 1238 (Ohio Ct. App. 3d Dist. 2009). “22(D)(1), a misdemeanor of the first degree; and failure to file an application for registration of a dog in violation of R.C. 955.21, a minor misdemeanor. 1 The citation for failure to obtain liability insurance merely listed the code section and the maximum possible penalty,…”
State v. White, 2024-Ohio-4654, 254 N.E.3d 665. “131 (the “C and D charges”), and two counts of failure to register dogs in violation of R.C. 955.21 (the “E and F charges”). Three of the charges (one for each offense) concerned White’s dog King, and three charges concerned White’s dog Kona.”
State v. Depascale, 463 N.E.2d 1284 (Ohio Ct. App. 10th Dist. 1983). · cites it 5× “Defendant-appellant, Catherine DePascale, was charged with three counts of violating R.C. 955.21 for refusing to register her dogs with the Franklin County Auditor for a license.”
State v. Sullivan, 2014-Ohio-1687. “131(C)(2) and for the failure to register the dog in violation of R.C. 955.21. A bench trial was held on the charges on April 15, 2013.”
State v. Neanover, 2021-Ohio-540. · cites it 2× “99(E)(1); and failure to register a dog, a minor misdemeanor in violation of R.C. 955.21 and 955.99(E)(1). The matter was bound over to the grand jury which indicted appellant on three misdemeanor offenses: cruelty to a companion animal, a first-degree misdemeanor in violation…”
State v. Stephens, 2017-Ohio-5868. · cites it 2× “{¶1} Defendant-appellant Robert Stephens appeals from his convictions for failing to register his dogs under R.C. 955.21. As part of Stephens’s convictions, the trial court designated Stephens’s dogs as dangerous dogs.”
Show all 13 citing cases →
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.