NACDL supports abolition of the death penalty in Ohio and all other states that continue to utilize it. 

Only a physician can provide abortion-inducing drugs, physician must be physically present at administration of initial dose, exceptions for self-managed by woman and legal delivery. O.R.C. §§ 2919.123, 2919.124(B).  New 2021 version preliminarily enjoined by Planned Parenthood Sw. Ohio v. Ohio Dep’t of Health, No. A 2101148 (Hamilton Cty, Ohio, C.C.P. Apr. 20, 2021).  Earlier version enjoined, limited to as-applied injunction, mooted on motion by Federal Drug Agency.  See Planned Parenthood of Sw. Ohio v. Dewine, 931 F.3d 530 (6th Cir. 2019), cert. denied, 141 S.Ct. 189 (2020).

Cleveland Metropolitan Bar Association hosted a critical discussion on the impact of the Dobbs decision on Ohio law. 

NACDL is providing resources regarding the Criminalization of Pregnancy and Reproductive Health to the criminal defense community. Resources are provided without warranty or guarantee. Please consult the laws and rules of your state and local authorities. Please log in to access them. Membership is NOT required.

See the various issues on which NACDL has conducted criminal justice advocacy in Ohio. Scroll to the bottom of the page to see active legislation in Ohio that NACDL is tracking.

NACDL successfully advocated for the passage of asset forfeiture reform legislation in Ohio. 

Policies and rulings on lengthy imprisonment terms in Ohio.

Executive Director Norman Reimer's letter to the Ohio House Judiciary Committee regarding a proposal to eliminate the civil forfeiture process and rely only on criminal forfeiture and its requirements (HB 347, 2015).

Brief of Eight Ethics, Criminal Defense and Public Interest Institutions and Associations as Amicus Curiae Supporting Contemnor-Appellant’s Appeal of the Municipal Court’s Contempt Conviction.

Argument: Appellant, a public defender, was appointed to represent a defendant the day before a court hearing. The “hearing” turned out to be the client’s trial, and appellant refused to try the case unprepared, for which the trial judge held in in contempt and sanctioned him with three days in jail, a $250 fine and court costs. Amici argued that one of the most fundamental tenets of the legal profession is the ethical requirement that no lawyer take a case when unable to provide competent and diligent representation.

Information on the policy and history of recording custodial interrogations in Ohio.

Attorney-client communications federal caselaw and state-specific anecdotal data in Ohio

Summary of recent discovery reforms adopted by states

Ohio Discovery Statute Current Rule 12 (Pleadings and Motions Before Trial: Defenses and Objections) section K (Appeal by state): Ohio law governing state appeal from an order suppressing or excluding evidence, or from an order directing pretrial disclosure of evidence

Ohio Discovery Statute Current Rule 16 (Discovery and Inspection)

Brief of Amicus Curiae, Office of the Ohio Public Defender [and the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers] in Support of Appellant, David C. Kinney, Jr.

Argument: The prohibition in R.C. 2953.08(D)(3)--which is entirely unique to Ohio--is most accurately understood as a legislative oversight with severe unintended consequences. But even if not, it is unconstitutional on both cruel-and-unusual-punishment and equal-protection grounds. Amici Curiae urge this Court to provide meaningful appellate review of sentences for aggravated murder in Ohio.

Brief of Amicus Curiae National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers in Support of Defendant-Appellant.

Argument: The Twelfth Appellate District was wrong to rely on dicta and focus on officer culpability in order to expand the narrow exceptions to the exclusionary rule. This court should apply the exclusionary rule when there is no equivocal binding precedent authorizing a particular search. Knotts and Karo were not unequivocal binding precedent at the time law enforcement placed a GPS tracking device on Johnson’s car. A cost-benefit analysis tilts in favor of suppression in Johnson’s case.