OHIO LEGISLATIVE SERVICE COMMISSION
Office of Research Legislative Budget
www.lsc.ohio.gov and Drafting Office
H.B. 149 Bill Analysis
135th General Assembly
Click here for H.B. 149’s Fiscal Note
Version: As Reported by House Aviation and Aerospace
Primary Sponsor: Rep. Willis
Effective Date:
Margaret E. Marcy, Attorney
SUMMARY
 Generally requires a peace officer to obtain a court-issued search warrant to collect
surveillance data using an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) if the peace officer otherwise
would need a warrant to physically enter the house or place in person to conduct the
search.
 Prohibits surveillance data and any information obtained from that data from being
admitted as evidence in a criminal proceeding if it was gathered under circumstances
that required a warrant and the warrant was not obtained.
 Establishes circumstances in which a warrant is not required for the use of a UAV,
including patrolling within 50 miles of an international border, when exigent
circumstances exist, to examine the scene of a vehicle accident, and for patrols before,
during, and after environmental or weather disasters.
 Establishes procedures that law enforcement must follow in order to utilize a UAV,
including a requirement to document and verify all flight data.
 Prohibits law enforcement from using a UAV armed with a lethal weapon.
 Specifies that UAV flight data is a public record, unless it qualifies for a public records
exemption under the Public Records Law.
 Allows a person accused of a crime that includes evidence gathered by a UAV to obtain,
via the discovery process, information relating to that person acquired by the UAV.
June 17, 2024
Office of Research and Drafting LSC Legislative Budget Office
DETAILED ANALYSIS
Criminal evidence derived from drones
Background
The Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution generally prohibits
unreasonable searches and seizures. It also generally requires searches to be based on probable
cause and made pursuant to a court-issued search warrant. However, the U.S. Supreme Court
has recognized several exceptions to the warrant requirement. For example, the Fourth
Amendment does not protect a person’s property that is open to the plain view of law
enforcement. Under this exception, the Court has found that law enforcement traveling in a
crewed aircraft in the public airways does not need “to obtain a warrant in order to observe
what is visible to the naked eye.”1 The Court has not yet addressed a similar case involving
unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), otherwise known as drones. Currently, judgments from the
lower courts are split, based on the circumstances of each case, regarding whether a
warrantless search with a drone violated the Fourth Amendment.2
Warrant requirement
The bill generally requires a peace officer to obtain a search warrant to use a UAV to
gather surveillance data (the data gathered by a UAV during its flight, including images, videos,
or other recordings) if the officer would be required to obtain a search warrant to physically
enter the house or place in-person to conduct the search. The requirement applies to both
entering the interior of a house or place with the UAV and to observing the interior of the
house or place with the UAV (given the technical precision of a UAV’s cameras). Unless
otherwise exempt, surveillance data and the information obtained through it is not admissible
in criminal proceedings if it was obtained without a warrant when a warrant was otherwise
required.3 The search warrants for law enforcement use of a UAV are the same as those used
under current law for a peace officer physically entering a house or place.
Circumstances that do not require a warrant
The bill allows a law enforcement agency to use a UAV for surveillance without a search
warrant as follows:
1. To patrol within 50 miles of a national border for purposes of policing that border to
prevent or deter the illegal entry of any individual, illegal substance, or contraband;
2. When exigent circumstances exist;
1 California v. Ciraolo, 476 U.S. 207, 218 (1986).
2 See for example State v. Stevens, 5th Dist. Coshocton No. 2022CA0017, 2023-Ohio-889 (finding no
Fourth Amendment violation) and Long Lake Twp. v. Maxon, App. No. 349230, 2022 Mich. App. LEXIS
5544 (September 15, 2022) (finding a Fourth Amendment violation).
3 R.C. 4561.60(A) and (B)(1); R.C. 4561.61(A).
P a g e |2 H.B. 149
As Reported by House Aviation and Aerospace
Office of Research and Drafting LSC Legislative Budget Office
3. Before, during, or immediately after an environmental or weather-related catastrophe
to allow the agency to better preserve public safety, to protect property, to survey
environmental damage in order to determine if a state of emergency should be
declared, or to conduct surveillance for the assessment and evaluation of damage,
erosion, flood, or contamination;
4. To examine the scene of a vehicle accident, monitor traffic congestion, or conduct other
forms of traffic law enforcement that typically does not require a peace officer to obtain
a search warrant in advance of conducting that enforcement;
5. To photograph and record evidence at a crime scene; and
6. For research, education, training, testing, or development efforts related to UAVs or
UAV systems, their technologies, and their potential applications, undertaken by or in
conjunction with a school, an institution of higher education, or a public or private
collaborator.4
Requirements and prohibitions for law enforcement
Requirements for use of a UAV
Under the bill, a law enforcement agency must do both of the following relative to its
use of a UAV:
1. Ensure that the agency and any peace officer employed by the agency documents all
flight data for each surveillance flight of UAV taken by or on behalf of the agency (flight
data is the data pertaining to a UAV’s flight, including the flight’s duration, path, and
mission objective); and
2. Verify that the flight data for each surveillance flight is accurate and complete.
A law enforcement agency must retain all surveillance data or flight data that is relevant to
an ongoing investigation, trial, or litigation until it is determined that it is no longer necessary for
that purpose. The flight data is a public record, unless it qualifies for a public records exemption
under the Public Records Law.5
UAV prohibitions
Under the bill, a law enforcement agency may not use, authorize the use of, or issue a
permit for the use of a UAV armed with any lethal weapon. An agency also may not authorize
the use of or issue a permit for the use of a UAV for the surveillance of one private individual by
another private individual unless the agency obtains express, informed consent from one of the
following:
1. The individual being surveilled; or
4 R.C. 4561.62.
5 R.C. 4561.60(B) and 4561.64(A), (B), and (D).
P a g e |3 H.B. 149
As Reported by House Aviation and Aerospace
Office of Research and Drafting LSC Legislative Budget Office
2. The owner of the real property on which the person being surveilled is present.6
Obtaining the data through discovery
Under the bill, a person accused of a crime that includes evidence gathered by a UAV
may obtain, via the subpoena and discovery process, information relating to that person
acquired in the course of surveillance of that person by the UAV. However, the person may not
obtain information related to the operational capabilities and technical conduct of the UAV. 7
HISTORY
Action Date
Introduced 04-04-23
Reported, H. Aviation & Aerospace 06-12-24
ANHB0149RH-135/ar
6 R.C. 4561.63.
7 R.C. 4561.64(C).
P a g e |4 H.B. 149
As Reported by House Aviation and Aerospace