On January 4, 2021, Ohio joined states including Alabama, Florida, Georgia, and Indiana, when the Governor signed Ohio Senate Bill 175, which includes Ohio’s version of the “Stand Your Ground” law. Stand Your Ground laws are controversial across the United States. Proponents argue that they are necessary to allow citizens to protect themselves in the face of force. Opponents argue that these laws will lead to higher instances of firearm use. However, across the board it is not uncommon to see a misunderstanding of the fundamentals of self-defense law in general.
So, Ohio is a Stand Your Ground State now…….But what does this mean?
Ohio’s self-defense laws have shape shifted over time. Up to this point in Ohio generally a person was allowed to use force in certain circumstances, so long as:
1) That person was not at fault in creating the situation giving rise to the altercation; and
2) That person had a reasonable belief, even if mistaken, that she was in immediate danger of death or great bodily harm; and
3) That person did not violate any duty to retreat (i.e. escape) to avoid the danger; and
4) That person used reasonable force.
In layman’s terms, you could legitimately use force if you did not start the confrontation; if a reasonable person would feel threatened; and if you had no way to get away (ie “retreat”). Finally, you would only be permitted to use a level of force appropriately matched to the threat (ie firing a gun at the threat of a well-matched fist fight…. not ok).
These elements are pivotal to a successful claim of self-defense, and are put under a microscope when a person is charged with a crime for using force. Prior to March of 2019, in a criminal prosecution, it was a Defendant’s burden to prove that he or she acted in self-defense when accused of a crime involving the use of force against another person. As of March of 2019, the law shifted, requiring that the government prove beyond reasonable doubt that an accused was not acting in self-defense in such a circumstance. While this may appear an obscure change, the effect of this shifting burden of proof has proven fatal to many prosecutions in cases involving the use of force. Indeed, proving that a person did not act in self-defense is a high hill to climb for many prosecutors, and increased acquittals in self-defense cases have proven that fact. In short, Ohio’s self-defense laws became increasingly friendly to an accused person in 2019, even before the addition of the new Stand Your Ground Provision.
Now, with the enactment of Senate Bill 175, it’s the substance of what must be proven to convict a person claiming self-defense that has shifted. The “Duty to Retreat” is removed entirely by the Stand Your Ground provision, which amends Ohio Revised Code 2901.09(B). Until now, a person claiming self-defense generally had a duty to retreat (remove himself from the situation) when he was somewhere other than his home or vehicle[1]. Therefore, until now, to prove that a person did not act in self-defense, a Prosecutor could focus on the fact that a Defendant had an opportunity to remove himself from the situation, but didn’t. In the past, this failure to “retreat” if an opportunity existed led to the conviction of countless Defendants who used force against another and claimed self-defense at trial.
NOT ANYMORE. With the passage of Senate Bill 175, Ohio’s self-defense law can be stated generally as follows:
A person is allowed to act in self-defense (including defense of another), so long as he did not create the situation; has a reasonable belief he is in danger; and uses an appropriate amount of force based on the threat.
The new changes to Ohio Law do not give individuals license to use force in an unbridled manner. The changes do, however, allow individuals to choose the use of force over taking a safe and available exit from the situation. This dichotomy is, of course, where the controversy lies. Regardless, it is clear that in a criminal prosecution, a claim of self-defense just became far more difficult for the government to disprove, affording even more protection to anyone facing criminal prosecution for using force against another person.
The current version of Ohio House Bill 175 can be found here.
DISCLAIMER: The foregoing is not intended to provide legal advice or counsel regarding any particular circumstance. The foregoing is for general informational purposes only, and does not create any attorney-client privilege with the reader.
[1] The duty to retreat did not apply a person in his own home (Castle doctrine) or in his vehicle. The Castle Doctrine applied to vehicles only where the person was a lawful occupant of his vehicle and where the aggressor was either inside the vehicle or attempting to enter the vehicle.
Questions?
Kate Bowling is a Criminal Defense attorney serving Dayton, Montgomery County, and surrounding areas. Kate’s unmatched trial skills, aggressive approach, and creative case strategies have resulted in a proven record of success in defending high level felony cases at both the state and federal level.
If you have a current or impending case, call for a confidential case evaluation to explore your potential defenses.