Ohio House Bill HB336

Ohio 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 6/10/25

Caption

To amend section 2929.18 and to enact section 2125.05 of the Revised Code to require a felony offender of an OVI-caused aggravated vehicular homicide to pay child maintenance when the victim is a parent, legal guardian, or custodian of a minor child, to allow child maintenance to be awarded in a wrongful death action when the offender is deceased, and to name this act the Sam Knisley Family Support Act.

Summary

HB336 would create a new form of court-ordered financial support called child maintenance in certain wrongful death and criminal sentencing cases involving an OVI-caused aggravated vehicular homicide. In a civil wrongful death action, a court could award child maintenance when the deceased defendant’s felony OVI violation proximately caused the death and the victim left at least one surviving minor child. The maintenance would be calculated using Ohio’s child support guidelines and could continue until each child turns 18, with payments made from the defendant’s estate through the clerk of courts to the surviving parent, legal custodian, or guardian. The bill also amends Ohio’s felony financial sanctions statute to require restitution in the form of child maintenance when a defendant is convicted of or pleads guilty to the specified aggravated vehicular homicide offense and the victim was a parent, guardian, or custodian of a minor child. It sets out how the amount is calculated, how payments are routed, how incarceration affects payment timing, and how later civil judgments interact with the criminal restitution order. The act would be named the Sam Knisley Family Support Act.

Impact

HB336 would add a new section to the Revised Code and modify existing sentencing law to make child maintenance an available and, in the criminal sentencing context, mandatory financial remedy in a narrow class of fatal OVI cases. It would expand the types of monetary obligations that can be imposed on an offender’s estate or as part of a felony sentence, while tying the amount to Ohio’s child support framework and preserving the ability of victims’ families to pursue civil wrongful death claims. The bill would primarily affect offenders, their estates, surviving minor children, and the surviving parent, guardian, or custodian receiving payments, as well as courts and clerks responsible for calculating and disbursing the funds.

Sentiment

The bill appears to be strongly sympathetic in purpose, focusing on support for children left behind after an alcohol-related fatal crash and framed as a family-support measure. Because the bill was only introduced and there is no recorded committee testimony or vote history in the provided materials, there is no formal record of support or opposition in the legislative process yet. The naming of the act and its narrow focus suggest a policy response intended to address a specific and emotionally compelling circumstance.

Contention

The main policy questions likely involve whether criminal restitution should be expanded into a child-support-like obligation, how such payments should be enforced against an offender’s estate or after incarceration, and how the new remedy would interact with existing wrongful death damages and civil judgments. Potential concerns may also include the administrative burden on courts and clerks, the fairness of calculating support as if the offender were a parent subject to a child support order, and whether the bill’s mandatory restitution approach is appropriate in cases where the offender is deceased or unable to pay. No specific objections or supporters are identified in the available transcript or vote record.