Background
J.B. was accused of forcibly taking one of minor victim T.R.’s Nike Air Jordan shoes. After a delinquency complaint alleged robbery, J.B. admitted to an amended charge of attempted robbery, an offense that would be a fourth-degree felony if committed by an adult.
T.R.’s mother, K.R., filed a victim’s-rights request form seeking a representative and notice of all proceedings. Nevertheless, neither T.R. nor K.R. received documented notice of the dispositional hearing or attended it. The juvenile court proceeded without asking the prosecutor about efforts to notify them, placed J.B. on intensive probation supervision, and entered no restitution order. T.R. and K.R. appealed, and the State conceded error.
The Court’s Holding
The Second District held that the juvenile court violated T.R.’s and K.R.’s constitutional and statutory rights to notice, presence, and an opportunity to be heard. Because they were absent from a proceeding implicating their rights, R.C. 2930.09(A)(2)(a) required the court to ask the prosecutor whether they had been notified, what notification efforts had been made, whether they had been advised of their right to be heard, and whether the required conference had occurred.
The court also held that the lack of notice and opportunity to participate deprived T.R. and K.R. of their right to seek full and timely restitution. It reversed the juvenile court’s judgment and remanded for a new dispositional hearing complying with Marsy’s Law and Revised Code Chapter 2930.
Key Takeaways
- When an absent victim has requested notifications, a juvenile court must make the inquiries required by R.C. 2930.09(A)(2)(a) before proceeding on matters implicating the victim’s rights.
- If timely or adequate notice was not provided, the court must continue the proceeding rather than decide a substantive issue affecting the victim’s rights or impose a disposition.
- Failing to notify victims of a dispositional hearing can violate their rights to attend, be heard, and pursue full and timely restitution.
Why It Matters
The decision confirms that Ohio’s Marsy’s Law protections apply with full force in juvenile delinquency proceedings. A filed victim’s-rights request cannot be treated as a formality; courts must verify compliance with statutory notice requirements before imposing disposition.
The ruling also shows that a failure to protect victims’ participatory and restitution rights may require reversal and an entirely new dispositional hearing, even when the State concedes the error.