Enact the Fair Trial Protection Act

hb933_00_IN

As Introduced

136th
General Assembly

Regular
Session
H. B. No. 933

2025-2026

Representative Williams

To
amend section 2945.21 of the Revised Code
to
enact the Fair Trial Protection Act to create a process for objecting
to a peremptory challenge on the basis that the challenge is based on
the prospective juror's race, color, religion, sex, military status,
national origin, disability, age, or ancestry.

BE
IT ENACTED BY THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE STATE OF OHIO:

Section
1.
That
section 2945.21 of the Revised Code be amended to read as follows:

Sec.
2945.21.
(A)(1)
In criminal cases in which there is only one defendant, each party,
in addition to the challenges for cause authorized by law, may
peremptorily challenge three of the jurors in misdemeanor cases and
four of the jurors in felony cases other than capital cases. If there
is more than one defendant, each defendant may peremptorily challenge
the same number of jurors as if
he
the
defendant

were the sole defendant.

(2)
Notwithstanding Criminal Rule 24, in capital cases in which there is
only one defendant, each party, in addition to the challenges for
cause authorized by law, may peremptorily challenge twelve of the
jurors. If there is more than one defendant, each defendant may
peremptorily challenge the same number of jurors as if
he
the
defendant

were the sole defendant.

(3)
In any case in which there are multiple defendants, the prosecuting
attorney may peremptorily challenge a number of jurors equal to the
total number of peremptory challenges allowed to all of the
defendants.

(B)
If any indictments, informations, or complaints are consolidated for
trial, the consolidated cases shall be considered, for purposes of
exercising peremptory challenges, as though the defendants or
offenses had been joined in the same indictment, information, or
complaint.

(C)
(C)(1)
No party shall exercise a peremptory challenge to remove a
prospective juror based on the juror's race, color, religion, sex,
military status, national origin, disability, age, or ancestry.

(2)
If a party objects to a peremptory challenge on the basis that the
challenge is based on the juror's membership in a protected class as
prohibited by division (C)(1) of this section, the court shall
require the party exercising the peremptory challenge to state, on
the record, a clear, reasonably specific, and neutral explanation for
challenging the juror.

(D)
Upon receiving an objection under division (C)(2) of this section and
the explanation required under division (C)(2) of this section, the
court shall evaluate the explanation on the record and shall not
allow the peremptory challenge unless it finds both of the following:

(1)
That it is more likely than not that the peremptory challenge was
exercised for reasons unrelated to the juror's membership in a
protected class;

(2)
That the articulated interest of the party exercising the peremptory
challenge substantially outweighs the interest in a fair trial by an
impartial jury drawn from a representative cross-section of the
community.

(E)
In making a determination under division (D) of this section, the
court shall consider all relevant circumstances, including all of the
following:

(1)
Whether similarly situated potential jurors who are not members of
the same protected class as the juror being challenged were also
challenged;

(2)
Whether the reason given for the challenge under division (C)(2) of
this section applies to other potential jurors who were not
challenged;

(3)
The relationship between the reason given for the challenge under
division (C)(2) of this section to the facts of the case;

(4)
Any pattern of challenges against members of the same protected class
as the juror being challenged;

(5)
The demeanor and credibility of the party exercising the challenge.

(F)
If the court determines that a peremptory challenge violates division
(C)(1) of this section, the court shall deny the challenge and seat
the juror or, if the juror has already been excused, the court shall
take appropriate remedial action, including declaring a mistrial, if
necessary.

(G)
If a peremptory challenge is the subject of an appeal for violating
division (C)(1) of this section, the court hearing the appeal shall
conduct a de novo review of the legal conclusions of the trial court
and shall only reverse the decision of the trial court on factual
findings if those findings are clearly erroneous. Any appeal from a
judgment based on a violation of division (C)(1) of this section
shall proceed with heightened scrutiny to ensure that the defendant's
right to a fair trial is protected.

(H)

The
exercise of peremptory challenges authorized by this section shall be
in accordance with the procedures of Criminal Rule 24.

Section
2.
That
existing section 2945.21 of the Revised Code is hereby repealed.

Section
3.
This
act shall be known as the Fair Trial Protection Act.