Good afternoon.
Attorney General Yost has issued formal Opinion No. 2025-003 in response to a request submitted by the Honorable Jordan C. Croucher, Noble County Prosecuting Attorney. The opinion addresses whether a crime victim may be charged the cost of retrieving a vehicle when a law enforcement agency directed its towing and storage. The opinion contains four conclusions:
R.C. 2930.11(A) applies when a law enforcement agency returns a victim’s property that was taken in the course of an investigation. The statute makes no exception for charges levied by a third party if the victim’s property was held for investigatory purposes on behalf of a law enforcement agency.
If a law enforcement agency directed a motor vehicle to be towed and stored, and the vehicle remained under the control and custody of law enforcement for the purpose of an investigation, the victim must not be charged the costs associated with towing and storage.
A victim is defined by the constitutional amendment known as Marsy’s Law, as incorporated in R.C. 2930.01(H), as “a person against whom the criminal offense or delinquent act is committed or who is directly and proximately harmed by the commission of the offence or act.” Law enforcement officers must apply that standard in determining whether a particular individual is a victim entitled to the release of property free of any charge.
R.C. 2930.11(A) clearly prohibits charging the victim for the return of property taken in the course of an investigation, but it does not specify who else is responsible for costs associated with towing or storage. As the answer depends on the particulars of a criminal case and any contractual arrangements between the law enforcement agency and a third party, the Attorney General cannot resolve this question of fact.
Please let me know if you have any questions.
Lindsay Kuhn Carr
Regional DirectorOffice of Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost
Direct: 216-346-0617
Comments