2006 Ohio Revised Code - 2901.21. Requirements for criminal liability.

§ 2901.21. Requirements for criminal liability.
 

(A)  Except as provided in division (B) of this section, a person is not guilty of an offense unless both of the following apply: 

(1) The person's liability is based on conduct that includes either a voluntary act, or an omission to perform an act or duty that the person is capable of performing; 

(2) The person has the requisite degree of culpability for each element as to which a culpable mental state is specified by the section defining the offense. 

(B)  When the section defining an offense does not specify any degree of culpability, and plainly indicates a purpose to impose strict criminal liability for the conduct described in the section, then culpability is not required for a person to be guilty of the offense. When the section neither specifies culpability nor plainly indicates a purpose to impose strict liability, recklessness is sufficient culpability to commit the offense. 

(C)  Voluntary intoxication may not be taken into consideration in determining the existence of a mental state that is an element of a criminal offense. Voluntary intoxication does not relieve a person of a duty to act if failure to act constitutes a criminal offense. Evidence that a person was voluntarily intoxicated may be admissible to show whether or not the person was physically capable of performing the act with which the person is charged. 

(D)  As used in this section: 

(1) Possession is a voluntary act if the possessor knowingly procured or received the thing possessed, or was aware of the possessor's control of the thing possessed for a sufficient time to have ended possession. 

(2) Reflexes, convulsions, body movements during unconsciousness or sleep, and body movements that are not otherwise a product of the actor's volition, are involuntary acts. 

(3) "Culpability" means purpose, knowledge, recklessness, or negligence, as defined in section 2901.22 of the Revised Code. 

(4) "Intoxication" includes, but is not limited to, intoxication resulting from the ingestion of alcohol, a drug, or alcohol and a drug. 
 

HISTORY: 134 v H 511 (Eff 1-1-74); 148 v H 318. Eff 10-27-2000.
 

Not analogous to former RC § 2901.21 (RS § 6819-1a; 98 v 124; GC § 12418; Bureau of Code Revision, 10-1-53), repealed 134 v H 511, § 2, eff 1-1-74.

 

19xx Committee Report or Comment.

1974 Committee Comment to H 511

The first part of this section codifies the fundamental distinction between criminal conduct on the one hand and innocent conduct or accident on the other: that, generally, an offense is not committed unless a person not only does a forbidden act or fails to meet a prescribed duty, but also has a certain guilty state of mind at the time of his act or failure. The guilty state of mind, the mens rea, may attach to one, several, or all of the elements of an offense, and different culpable (blameworthy) mental states may attach to different elements in the same offense, depending on the statute defining the offense. 

The second part of the section provides a uniform rule for determining whether culpability is required when the statute is silent as to the offender's mental state at the time of the offense. Although the case law is not entirely clear, the apparent rule is that even if the statute fails to specify any degree of culpable mental state, strict criminal liability will not be applied unless the statute plainly indicates that the legislature intended to impose strict liability. In essence, the section codifies this rule, and also provides that when an intention to impose strict liability is not apparent, recklessness is sufficient culpability to commit the offense. Under existing case law, either intent or scienter is required in such instances, although it is not clear which is required in a given case.