Supreme Court of Ohio Clarifies Stalking Statute

The Supreme Court of Ohio ruled that petitioners for a civil stalking protection order are not required to prove they have already experienced mental distress. In a 5-2 decision, the Court held that R.C. 2903.211 is satisfied if a petitioner reasonably believes an offender will cause mental distress if encounters continue. The majority opinion resolved conflicting lower court interpretations by applying a grammatical analysis to the state's "menacing-by-stalking" statute. This decision affirmed a Fifth District Court of Appeals ruling, which granted a protection order to a man following hostile confrontations with his ex-wife’s partner.

Popular posts from this blog

Reorganizing Ohio's Court Rules: Public Comment Open Until October 24, 2025

Proposed changes to court rules in Ohio are open for public comment until October 24, 2025 . The main initiative is a multipart effort to reorganize the rules by moving those concerning court practices and procedures from the Rules of Superintendence to the appropriate Rules of Practice and Procedure (Civil, Criminal, and Juvenile). This restructuring aims to create a more logical organization for the rules. Also under consideration are other amendments for the Rules of Appellate Procedure to enhance clarity and accommodate electronic filing, and for the Traffic Rules to comply with new legislation. These recommendations were presented by the relevant commissions and approved by the Supreme Court of Ohio for public review. Comments on the proposed Superintendence Rule amendments should be sent to:      Keely McWhorter       Supreme Court of Ohio       65 S. Front St.       Columbus, Ohio 43215   ...
Read more

Ohio Supreme Court Approves Limited AI Use for Court Translations

The Ohio Supreme Court adopted new rules that permit the use of artificial intelligence (AI) for translating non-substantive court information, such as website text or office hours, provided its use is disclosed. However, the rules strictly prohibit using AI to translate or interpret substantive legal writings like orders, forms, or any part of a legal proceeding, citing risks of error and jeopardizing constitutional rights. These new regulations, which went into effect on November 13th, are part of a broader effort to address the demand for qualified interpreters in Ohio courtrooms and also update requirements for interpreter certification. Read more about the rule changes on Bloomberg Law .
Read more

Ohio HB 492: Mandatory ID at Traffic Stops

Ohio lawmakers are considering House Bill 492 to create a new "refusal to disclose" law, making it a fourth-degree misdemeanor for drivers to refuse to show identification during a traffic stop. This proposed legislation is meant to address a situation where Ohio courts have repeatedly ruled that simply refusing to show a license does not automatically constitute the crime of obstructing official business. While supporters, including the Fraternal Order of Police, argue the bill is necessary to close this confusing legal gap, critics have raised concerns about the potential for racial profiling and abuse of the law. Read more about the proposed legislation on Cleveland.com .
Read more