The Twelfth Appellate District of Ohio has upheld a lower court’s decision denying Keirstin Schneider’s request for Intervention in Lieu of Conviction (ILC). The ruling, handed down on October 6, 2025, affirms that Schneider was not eligible for ILC due to the nature of the charges against her.
The Case’s Background
The case stems from an incident on January 22, 2025, when Schneider was indicted by the Butler County Grand Jury. She was charged with a fourth-degree felony: failure to comply with an order or signal of a police officer, violating Ohio Revised Code 2921.331(B). The charges arose after Schneider allegedly led law enforcement on a high-speed chase. During the chase, which lasted approximately 16 minutes, she was accused of disregarding traffic signals, driving the wrong way on a one-way street, and exceeding the speed limit by a significant margin.
The ILC Request and Denial
Schneider filed a request for ILC on February 10, 2025. ILC is a program that allows certain offenders to receive treatment and avoid a criminal conviction. However, the trial court denied her request on April 7, 2025, citing R.C. 2951.041(B)(10). This section of the law states that a defendant is ineligible for ILC if they are charged with an offense that would disqualify them from operating a commercial motor vehicle. The court reasoned that because the charge against Schneider required a driver’s license suspension, she was ineligible. Under Ohio law, a driver’s license suspension would prevent her from obtaining a commercial driver’s license.
After the denial of her ILC request, Schneider pleaded no contest to the original charge and was found guilty. She was subsequently sentenced to five years of community control on May 5, 2025. Schneider then appealed the trial court’s decision on May 13, 2025.
The Appeal and the Court’s Reasoning
Schneider’s appeal focused on the trial court’s denial of her ILC request. She argued that the court erred in finding her ineligible. However, the appellate court disagreed.
Standard of Review: De Novo
The appellate court clarified that it was applying a “de novo” standard of review. This means the court independently reviewed the case, giving no deference to the trial court’s interpretation of the law.
The Relevant Law: R.C. 2951.041(B) and R.C. 2921.331(B)
The court focused on R.C. 2951.041(B), which outlines the eligibility requirements for ILC. Specifically, the court considered R.C. 2951.041(B)(10), which states that an offender is ineligible if charged with an offense that would disqualify them from operating a commercial motor vehicle under Chapter 4506 of the Ohio Revised Code.
The court then connected this to the charge against Schneider: failure to comply with a police officer’s order, as defined in R.C. 2921.331(B). This statute includes a mandatory driver’s license suspension. The court explained that because Schneider’s charge resulted in a driver’s license suspension, she was not eligible for ILC. The court cited R.C. 4506.06(A), which states that a commercial driver’s license temporary instruction permit cannot be issued to someone without a valid driver’s license.
Schneider’s Argument Rejected
Schneider argued that “qualifying circumstances exist” that should have led the trial court to grant her ILC. The appellate court rejected this argument, stating that the law is clear: because the charge against Schneider would result in a driver’s license suspension, she was ineligible for ILC. The court emphasized that it was simply applying the plain language of the statutes.
Conclusion
The appellate court overruled Schneider’s single assignment of error and affirmed the trial court’s decision, concluding that Schneider was not statutorily eligible for ILC. The court’s judgment entry ordered that a mandate be sent to the Butler County Court of Common Pleas to execute the judgment.