|
STATUTE:
Title XLV. Motor Vehicles--Aeronautics--Watercraft. Chapter
4511. Traffic laws--Operation of Motor Vehicles. Bicycles. Section 4511.53
Rules for Bicycles, Motorcycles and Snowmobiles. :
". . . No person who is under the age of eighteen years,
or who holds a motorcycle operator's endorsement or license bearing a
"novice" designation that is currently in effect as provided in
section 4507.13 of the Revised Code, shall operate a motorcycle on a
highway, or be a passenger on a motorcycle, unless wearing a protective
helmet on his head, and no other person shall be a passenger on a motorcycle
operated by such a person unless similarly wearing a protective helmet. . .
."
FINE:
The fine for "no safety equipment" under the current
Ohio law according to Middletown Municipal Court, Middletown, Ohio, is $75.00.
STANDARDS:
Title XLV. Motor Vehicles--Aeronautics--Watercraft. Chapter
4511. Traffic laws--Operation of Motor Vehicles. Bicycles. Section 4511.53
Rules for Bicycles, Motorcycles and Snowmobiles. :
". . . The helmet, safety glasses, or other protective
eye device shall conform with regulations prescribed and promulgated by the
director of public safety."
COURT DECISIONS:
"Requirements of 4511.53 that motorcycle operators and
passengers wear protective helmets and glasses are reasonable, bear
substantial relation to public health and general welfare, and are
constitutionally valid and require no implementation by regulations adopted by
director of highway safety." State v. Stouffer (Ohio App. 1971) 28
Ohio App.2d 229, 276 N.E.2d 651, 57 O.O.2d 342.
"4511.53, as amended and effective January 1, 1968,
which requires the operator of a motorcycle on a highway to wear a protective
helmet on his head, is constitutional." State v. Craig (Ohio App.
1969) 19 Ohio App.2d 29, 249 N.E.2d 75, 48 O.O.2d 28.
"A demurrer should be sustained to an affidavit
charging the operation of a motorcycle without wearing a helmet and glasses as
required by RC 4511.53 where such legislative inhibition is not supported by
facts demonstrating a compelling public danger arising from its absence, which
would violate defendant's rights under US Const Am 14 and O Const Art I, s
1." State v. Betts (Ohio Mun. 1969) 21 Ohio Misc. 175, 252 N.E.2d
866, 49 O.O.2d 22,0 O.O.2d 351.
CURRENT ACTIVITY:
If you know of any current activity regarding efforts to remove or amend
Ohio's helmet law, in the Legislature or the Courts, please e-mail
that information to us so we can update this site. Thanks.
STATE WEBSITES:
-- DISCLAIMER --
The foregoing is provided as educational information only and
is not legal advice.
Back
|