Family, prosecutors and county officials urge stiffer penalties and accountability in "Avery's Law" dog-bite bill

A seventh-grade student who survived a near-fatal dog mauling and multiple witnesses urged the Senate Judiciary Committee on Wednesday to advance House Bill 247, known locally as Avery's Law, which would strengthen Ohio statutes on dangerous and vicious dogs and raise penalties for owners whose animals cause severe injury.

Avery Russell, who testified that she was attacked during a play date, told the committee about the physical and emotional aftermath. "I truly thought I was going to die," Avery Russell said. She described multiple surgeries and ongoing therapy and said the bill gives her "hope" that future victims will be better protected.

Her mother, Drew Russell, recounted the family's year of medical care and said criminal penalties in the case were insufficient. "She got four days in jail, three years probation, and was allowed to keep one of her violent dogs," Drew Russell said. "The punishments need to equate to the crimes."

Proponents, including Licking County Commissioner Tim Bubb and Larry Williams of the Ohio County Dog Wardens Association, described gaps in existing law and urged courts and dog wardens to have clearer authority to impound, designate and restrict dogs that commit unprovoked attacks. "Wardens need a way to impound, seize vicious and dangerous dogs when they act in an unprovoked manner," Larry Williams, chief dog warden for Licking County, said, recounting cases in which repeat attacks produced only misdemeanor charges and allowed dogs to remain in homes.

America Andrade, who said she prosecuted the Reynoldsburg case, described how the current statutory scheme often treats severe attacks as low-level misdemeanors that can be resolved by paying a fine. "If we hadn't stepped in, the owner could have just paid the ticket and been done with it," Andrade said. She and other proponents told the committee the substitute bill replaces the so-called "one free bite" rule with a procedure that allows designation of a dog as dangerous or vicious after a first incident that causes death or serious physical injury, and that it raises penalties and owner responsibilities.

The bill would: allow courts to designate dogs as nuisance, dangerous or vicious based on specified criteria; replace the single-bite presumption in current law; increase penalties for violations of confinement and registration requirements; and create new criminal liability where owners negligently fail to prevent a vicious-dog act. Proponents also noted provisions intended to give county dog wardens clearer arrest and enforcement authority and to encourage registration to fund wardens' offices.

Supporters stressed that the substitute version adopted in the House retains some appeals protections and removes a requirement that designation hearings be held concurrently with criminal proceedings. "The changes are common-sense measures, good compromise," Tim Bubb said.

Witnesses presented photographic and investigative details from recent severe attacks and described cases in which victims sustained deep lacerations, loss of tissue and long recoveries; they urged the committee to move the bill forward so local prosecutors and courts would have stronger tools.

The committee took no final vote on the bill; testimony was entered and the hearing was recorded as the bill's second hearing.

The episode spurred several panelists to urge lawmakers to consider both increased criminal penalties and statutory language that would allow courts to require measures such as confinement, obedience training, liability insurance or, in extreme cases, euthanasia when justified by evidence presented at a designation hearing.

A number of written proponent filings were noted for the record, including statements from the American Kennel Club and Nationwide Children's Hospital. The chair closed the testimony with thanks to the child and family for appearing.

If advanced, the bill would next proceed through committee deliberations and potential floor action in the General Assembly.