Lifetime Citizen Portal Access — AI Briefings, Alerts & Unlimited Follows
Proponent says amended HB 168 narrows child-enticement law to meet Ohio Supreme Court standard
Loading...
Summary
Richard Del Aquila testified that amended HB 168 would clarify mens rea and privilege in ORC 2905.05 to restore constitutional compliance after Ramage, remove redundant enumerations of privileged actors and affirmative defenses, and reduce enforcement uncertainty.
Richard Del Aquila presented proponent testimony to the Senate Judiciary Committee on amended House Bill 168, saying the measure would bring Ohio Revised Code 2905.05 into constitutional compliance.
Del Aquila summarized the history: he said the statute has not been amended since the Ohio Supreme Court’s 2014 decision in Romage (Ramage), which found parts of the law unconstitutionally overbroad and likely to criminalize innocent conduct. He said courts and prosecutors have experienced confusion, leading to dismissed charges and civil claims. Del Aquila explained the amended bill adds a mens rea requirement so prohibited solicitation, coaxing, enticing or alluring a child under 14 is charged only when the person acts with a criminal purpose or malicious motivation, and it clarifies that privilege (e.g., parents, emergency responders, actors under authority) negates liability.
On questions from Ranking Member Hicks Hudson, Del Aquila confirmed the statutory list of affirmative defenses would be removed; the witness said affirmative defenses remain available in court even when not enumerated in the statute. The committee noted written proponent testimony from the City of Parma Law Department and the Ohio Prosecuting Attorneys Association. The committee recorded this as the second hearing on HB 168.
Del Aquila urged support, arguing the amendment restores clear prosecutorial standards while preserving protections for children.
