OHIO LEGISLATIVE SERVICE COMMISSION
Office of Research Legislative Budget
www.lsc.ohio.gov and Drafting Office
H.B. 500 Bill Analysis
134th General Assembly
Click here for H.B. 500’s Fiscal Note
Version: As Introduced
Primary Sponsors: Reps. Stewart and Lampton
Effective Date:
Sarah A. Maki, Attorney
SUMMARY
 Eliminates mandatory transfers (bindovers) of a child’s case from juvenile court to
criminal court for criminal prosecution.
 Modifies the factors a juvenile court must consider in determining whether to make a
discretionary transfer (bindover) of a child’s case from the court to criminal court for
criminal prosecution and grants a child the right to appeal a transfer decision.
 Eliminates reverse transfers (bindovers) of a mandatory transfer case back to juvenile
court for determination of a disposition.
DETAILED ANALYSIS
Introduction
Currently, when a child (a person under age 18) commits any violation of law that would
be a criminal offense if committed by an adult or commits a traffic violation, except as
described below, the charges against the child are considered in juvenile court. If the child is
found in juvenile court to have committed the violation, the person is adjudicated a delinquent
child or a juvenile traffic offender and the court imposes a disposition authorized for that
category of adjudication. In certain circumstances, though, the child’s case must be transferred,
and in other cases it may be transferred, to criminal court for criminal prosecution.
Mandatory transfer of child’s case
The bill repeals all existing provisions that require the mandatory transfer, commonly
referred to as the “mandatory bindover,” of a child’s case from juvenile court to criminal court
February 14, 2022
Office of Research and Drafting LSC Legislative Budget Office
for criminal prosecution1 and all provisions that relate to, or refer to, such a mandatory
transfer.2
Currently, the mandatory transfer provisions require a juvenile court to transfer a child’s
case to a criminal court for criminal prosecution if any of the following applies:3
1. The child is charged with a “category one offense” (aggravated murder, murder,
attempted aggravated murder, or attempted murder) and either: (a) the child was age
16 or 17 at the time of the act charged and there is probable cause to believe that the
child committed the act charged, or (b) the child was age 14 or 15 at the time of the act
charged, previously was adjudicated a delinquent child for committing a category one or
“category two offense” (voluntary manslaughter, kidnapping, rape, aggravated arson,
aggravated robbery, aggravated burglary, the former offense of felonious sexual
penetration, or a first degree felony offense of involuntary manslaughter), and was
committed to the Department of Youth Services (DYS) based on that adjudication and
there is probable cause to believe that the child committed the act charged.
2. The child is charged with a category two offense other than kidnapping, the child was
age 16 or 17 at the time of the act charged, and either: (a) the child previously was
adjudicated a delinquent child for committing a category one or category two offense
and was committed to DYS based on that adjudication and there is probable cause to
believe that the child committed the act charged, or (b) the child is alleged to have had a
firearm on or about the child’s person or under the child’s control while committing the
act charged and to have displayed, brandished, indicated possession of, or used the
firearm to facilitate the commission of the act charged and there is probable cause to
believe that the child committed the act charged.
3. (3) The child is eligible for a discretionary transfer (i.e., the child is age 14 or older and is
charged with a felony) and previously was convicted of a felony in a case that was
transferred to a criminal court, or the child is domiciled in another state and is alleged to
be a delinquent child for committing a felony, and, if the act charged had been
committed in that other state, the child would be subject to criminal prosecution as an
adult under the law of that other state without the need for a transfer of jurisdiction
from a juvenile, family, or similar noncriminal court to a criminal court.
4. The child is no longer within the definition of “child” under Juvenile Court Law because:
(a) a prior case of the child was transferred for criminal prosecution, the child was
convicted of a felony in that case, a serious youthful offender (SYO) dispositional
sentence was imposed for that offense, and the adult portion of that sentence was
1 Repeal of R.C. 2152.10(A), and 2152.12(A); also R.C. 2152.02(C)(5).
2 R.C. 2151.23(I), R.C. 2152.02(G), (I), (Q), (S), and redesignated (W) and (Y), repeal of R.C. 2152.12(F),
R.C. 2152.12 redesignated (D), (F), (G), and (H), and R.C. 2152.26(G)(2).
3 Repealed R.C. 2152.10(A) and 2152.12(A).
P a g e |2 H.B. 500
As Introduced
Office of Research and Drafting LSC Legislative Budget Office
invoked, or (b) the child was adjudicated a delinquent child for the commission of an
act, an SYO dispositional sentence was imposed for that act, and the adult portion of
that sentence was invoked.
Discretionary transfer of child’s case
The bill retains the existing provisions that authorize the discretionary transfer,
commonly referred to as the “discretionary bindover,” of a child’s case from juvenile court to
criminal court for criminal prosecution but modifies the factors a juvenile court must consider
in determining whether to make such a transfer and grants a child the right to appeal a transfer
decision.4
In general; right to appeal transfer decision
Under existing law, substantively unchanged by the bill, if a child who is charged in
juvenile court with a felony is age 14 or older, the child is eligible for discretionary transfer to
criminal court for criminal prosecution, with the juvenile court being required to follow
specified procedures in deciding whether to transfer the case.5 If a complaint is filed in juvenile
court alleging that a child is a delinquent child for committing a felony, the juvenile court at a
hearing may transfer the case if the court finds: (1) that the child was age 14 or older at the
time of the act charged, (2) that there is probable cause to believe that the child committed the
act charged, and (3) after considering and conducting a balancing test involving specified
factors (see below), that the child is not amenable to care or rehabilitation within the juvenile
system and the safety of the community may require that the child be subject to adult
sanctions.6 Before considering a transfer, the court must order an investigation into the child’s
social history, education, family situation, and any other factor bearing on whether the child is
amenable to juvenile rehabilitation, including a mental examination of the child by a public or
private agency or a person qualified to make the examination. The child may waive the
examination, and a child’s refusal to submit to a mental examination constitutes a waiver.7
The bill adds two provisions regarding the discretionary transfer mechanism described
above:
1. First, regarding the investigation that a court must order before considering a transfer,
the bill specifies that no report on the investigation may include details of the alleged
offense committed by the child.8
2. Second, under the bill, a child who has been found not amenable to care or
rehabilitation within the juvenile system under the provisions described above has a
4 R.C. 2152.12.
5 R.C. 2152.10(B), redesignated as R.C. 2152.10.
6 R.C. 2152.12(B), redesignated as (A).
7 R.C. 2152.12(C), redesignated as (B).
8 R.C. 2152.12(C), redesignated as (B).
P a g e |3 H.B. 500
As Introduced
Office of Research and Drafting LSC Legislative Budget Office
right to appeal the transfer. Upon issuing the order for transfer, the juvenile court
immediately must stay the transfer for a period of 14 days, unless waived by the child.
An appeal under this provision must be made pursuant to the Rules of Appellate
Procedure and, to the extent not in conflict with those Rules, R.C. Chapter 2505.9
R.C. Chapter 2505 subjects the appeal to the Rules of Appellate Procedure and the Rules
of Practice of the Supreme Court.10
Factors to be considered in discretionary transfer decision
Operation of the bill
Existing law specifies factors, changed by the bill, that a court must consider in making
its amenability/community safety decision and its final transfer decision at a discretionary
transfer hearing. Some of the factors are to be considered in favor of making a transfer and
some are to be considered against making a transfer, and the court in making its decision is
required to conduct a balancing test of those factors. Under the bill, in making its decisions on
those issues, the court must consider the following factors that are relevant (the bill does not
retain the balancing test):11
1. The level of harm to the victim in the child’s alleged act, including the level of physical,
psychological, or serious economic harm the victim suffered or whether the child did
not cause physical harm to any person or property, or have reasonable cause to believe
that harm of that nature would occur, and whether the physical or psychological harm
the victim suffered was exacerbated because of the physical or psychological
vulnerability or age of the victim;
2. The victim’s role, including whether the child’s relationship with the victim facilitated
the act charged, and whether the victim induced or facilitated the act charged or the
child acted under provocation in allegedly committing the act charged;
3. The circumstances of the offense, including whether the child was not the principle
actor in the act charged, or, at the time of the act charged, the child was under the
negative influence or coercion of another person, whether the child allegedly
committed the act charged for hire or as part of a gang, and whether the child had a
firearm on or about the child’s person or under the child’s control at the time of the act
charged, the act charged is not the offense of carrying a concealed weapon, and the
child, during the commission of the act charged, allegedly used, displayed, brandished,
or indicated possession of a firearm;
9 R.C. 2152.12(E) and 2505.02(B)(8).
10 R.C. 2505.03 to 2505.05 and other provisions of R.C. Chapter 2505, not in the bill other than
R.C. 2505.02.
11 R.C. 2152.12(C).
P a g e |4 H.B. 500
As Introduced
Office of Research and Drafting LSC Legislative Budget Office
4. The child’s prior experience in the juvenile court, including the presence or lack of any
prior or current cases and rehabilitative efforts by the court and the availability of a
reasonable and appropriate juvenile sanction or program that has not yet been utilized;
5. The child’s individual developmental characteristics, including whether the child is
emotionally, physically, or psychologically mature enough for the transfer, and whether
the child has a behavioral health issue, including a mental illness, substance abuse
disorder, or developmental disability;
6. The child’s background, including family and environment, and trauma history;
7. Whether there is sufficient time to rehabilitate the child within the juvenile system.
Currently
Currently, in considering whether to transfer a child under a discretionary transfer, a
juvenile court must consider in favor of a transfer, as relevant: factors similar to some of those
listed in paragraphs (2), (3), (4), (6), and (8), above, when they reflect negatively on the child;
that the child at the time of the act charged was awaiting adjudication or disposition as a
delinquent child, was under a community control sanction, or was on parole for a prior
delinquent child adjudication or conviction; that the results of any previous juvenile sanctions
and programs indicate that rehabilitation of the child will not occur in the juvenile system; and
any other relevant factors. A juvenile court must consider against a transfer, as relevant, factors
similar to some of those listed in paragraphs (2), (3), (4), (5), (6), and (8), above, when they
reflect positively on the child. Currently, the juvenile court, court in making its transfer decision,
is required to consider whether the factors in favor of making a transfer outweigh the factors
against making a transfer.12
Reverse transfer to determine a disposition in a mandatory
transfer case
Because the bill repeals the existing provisions that require the mandatory transfer of a
child’s case to criminal court for criminal prosecution, as described above, it also repeals the
existing provisions that, in specified circumstances, provide for the reverse transfer of a
mandatory transfer case, commonly referred to as the “reverse bindover,” back to juvenile
court for determination of a disposition.13 The bill also generally repeals existing provisions that
relate, or refer, to such a reverse transfer,14 but retains references to such a reverse transfer
under current law with respect to a restriction against the release of information regarding a
conviction of a child who was subject to such a transfer,15 to the jurisdiction of juvenile courts
12 R.C. 2152.12(B)(3), redesignated as (A)(3), and repealed R.C. 2152.12(D) and (E).
13 Repeal of R.C. 2152.121 – see Section 3.
14 R.C. 2151.23(H), 2152.021, 2152.12(A)(3), and 2152.13(A).
15 R.C. 109.57(E)(2).
P a g e |5 H.B. 500
As Introduced
Office of Research and Drafting LSC Legislative Budget Office
over a child who was subject to such a transfer,16 to the invocation of the adult portion of an
SYO dispositional sentence,17 and to the public record status of information related to the
confinement of a child in specified circumstances under the reverse transfer mechanism.18
Currently, the reverse transfer provisions apply when a child’s case is transferred under
either of two mandatory transfer provisions and the child is convicted of an offense in the case.
The first is when the child is charged with aggravated murder, murder, attempted aggravated
murder, or attempted murder, the child was 16 or 17 at the time of the act charged, and there
is probable cause to believe the child committed that act. The second is when the child is
charged with a category two offense, the child was 16 or 17 at the time of the act charged,
there is probable cause to believe the child committed that act, and the child is alleged to have
had a firearm while committing the act charged and to have displayed, brandished, indicated
possession of, or used the firearm in committing the act charged.
In either case, the court in which the child is convicted of the crime after the transfer
(the court of conviction) must determine whether, had a complaint been filed in juvenile court
alleging that the child was a delinquent child for committing an act that would be the offense of
conviction if committed by an adult, the existing mandatory transfer provisions would have
required, or the discretionary transfer provisions would have allowed, transfer of the case for
criminal prosecution. Depending on what the court determines, it must do one of three things:
transfer the case back to juvenile court for that court’s imposition of a traditional juvenile
sentence on the offender; impose sentence on the child under the Criminal Sentencing Law
with the sentence being invoked; or impose sentence on the child under the Criminal
Sentencing Law, transfer the case back to the juvenile court, and stay the sentence pending
juvenile court action. If the court uses the third option, the juvenile court follows specified
procedures and, depending on its findings, either imposes an SYO dispositional sentence on the
child or transfers jurisdiction of the case back to the court of conviction with the sentence
imposed by that court being invoked.19
HISTORY
Action Date
Introduced 12-02-21
H0500-I-134/ts
16 R.C. 2152.02(C)(5), (Q), and redesignated (W).
1