Login | August 12, 2025
HB 607 and HJR2: Public safety must be factor when judges determine bail
KEITH ARNOLD
Special to the Legal News
Published: April 29, 2022
A piece of legislation that awaits committee action in the Ohio House of Representatives would require judges take into consideration the public’s safety when setting bail for accused criminals.
The bill, in addition to a joint resolution that proposes an amendment to the Ohio Constitution, is a direct response to a decision by the Supreme Court of Ohio earlier this year that held public safety is not a consideration with respect to the financial conditions of bail.
Republican Reps. Jeff LaRe of Pickerington and D.J. Swearingen of Huron introduced the constitutional amendment and bill, filed respectively as House Joint Resolution 2 and House Bill 607, late last month.
“Public safety should be top priority, but the court’s decision has put Ohioans at risk,” LaRe said at the time of the bill’s introduction.
The lawmaker noted that the ruling in DuBose v. McGuffey was playing out in lower courts throughout Ohio. He offered as an example a Youngstown judge having lowered the bond of a suspect who faced a charge of aggravated murder and three counts of attempted murder.
LaRe said he expects defense lawyers increasingly to use the high court ruling to argue for lower bonds, making the issue critically timely.
Both the bill and constitutional amendment should ensure that judges are able to consider all relevant information when setting bond, Swearingen said.
“Those accused of crimes are innocent until proven guilty, but it’s important that judges are also able to take into account the safety of innocent Ohioans when letting a defendant out on bond,” he added.
In testimony in support of the measures, Secretary of State Dave Yost said the supreme court ruling effectively has created a binary choice for judges and prosecutors: either the offender is so dangerous that the prosecution should seek an outright denial of bail, or failing to reach this high standard, bail must be set irrespective of the possible harm the offender may cause in the community.
“Forcing every offender through this scheme––each with a myriad of unique circumstances––inevitably leads to wasted judicial resources and a public that is less safe,” Yost told members of the Criminal Justice Committee. “HB 607 and HJR 2 seek to address the very real public safety concerns caused by the Dubose decision by telling the court that public safety must be considered when bail is set.”
He said the bill makes abundantly clear that public safety must be considered when setting bail under Ohio law, while the resolution is a necessary component as the Dubose ruling was based on justices’ interpretation of the constitution.
A press release noted that it takes 60 votes in the Ohio House and 20 in the Ohio Senate to place a constitutional amendment on the ballot.
The deadline to place an issue on the November ballot is in August.
“By sending unambiguous language to Ohioans that public safety and other considerations must be included when determining bail, Ohioans can definitively instruct the court with their votes about their desire for public safety to be restored to the bail analysis,” Yost said.
The secretary of state worked with the state association of prosecuting attorneys in collaboration with lawmakers on the issue, he said.
Copyright © 2022 The Daily Reporter - All Rights Reserved