Bill To Protect Against Violent Juveniles Held Up By Court Fee Dispute

COLUMBUS, Ohio -- Would a protective order have stopped Johanna Orozco's ex-boyfriend from shooting her in the face? The answer is impossible to determine, but advocates for victims of domestic and dating violence say it could help prevent abuse on some occasions.

Orozco has been working to convince Ohio lawmakers to allow protection orders against juveniles accused of dating violence or domestic violence. As it stands, the law does not allow for a juvenile protection order. Orozco knows this too well.

In February 2007, Orozco's ex-boyfriend, Juan Ruiz, raped her. Let out of jail on house arrest, Ruiz continued to stalk Orozco. She attempted to obtain a protective order against him, but because Ruiz was only 17 years old at the time, her attempted proved unsuccessful.

The next month, Ruiz fired a sawed-off shotgun into Orozco's face. Many surgeries later, Orozco is moving on with her life while Ruiz serves a 24-year prison sentence in Mansfield.

"It's not something that was easy to go through and I would hate to see somebody else have to go through it," Orozco told attendees at a rally in Cleveland this weekend.

But in the three years since her life was forever altered, state law regarding juvenile protection orders remains unchanged. In fact, the Ohio Domestic Violence Network has been working to change the law since 2005.

"I'm not really sure why we continue to delay, but I think five years is more than enough," said Melinda Swan, board chair for the group.

In June, House Bill 10 passed the Ohio House, giving Orozco and others hope that the law would be changed to give juvenile courts the authority to issue protective orders when a juvenile is alleged to have engaged in domestic violence or dating violence. Eight months later, the Ohio State Senate has yet to vote on the bill.

In December, HB 10 passed out of the Senate's Civil Justice Committee with a catch. In moving the bill forward, committee chairman Bill Seitz (R-Cincinnati) tacked on unrelated amendments allowing local courts to collect extra fees for court filings. The fees are now holding up a vote on the Senate floor.

Senate President Bill Harris (R-Ashland) was unavailable Monday, but spokesperson Maggie Ostrowski told NBC4, "the issue is about fees, not about the content of the domestic violence portion of the bill. There is no disagreement over those issues. Once they're able to workout those concerns over the fees in the bill it will be put on the floor."

Ostrowski could not say when a vote would occur.

Swan said the Senate's support for juvenile protection orders is welcome, but the squabble over the unrelated court fees should not hold up a floor vote.

"I would suggest simply removing the fees. They have nothing, frankly, to do with the original legislation," Swan said.

Reached by phone, Sen. Seitz said he did not want to remove the court fee amendments from the bill, adding that legislative action has been so sparse in the past year that he and others sought the protection order bill as a means to address those issues.

The dispute now threatens to prevent the protection order bill passing, though Ostrowski said a vote would eventually take place. Governor Ted Strickland has called on the Senate to pass the bill.

For additional information, stay with nbc4i.com and NBC 4 and refresh nbc4i.com -- Where Accuracy Matters.
To submit a story idea or news tip, e-mail us at stories@nbc4i.com.
NBC 4 POLITICS: Headlines, Interactives & Video
MORE: NBC 4 Local News | Local Crime News
NBC 4 SPORTS: Sports News, Video