The answer is no according to the most recent decision released by the Twelfth District Court of Appeals. In State v. Hurst (2018), 93 N.E.3d 1007, 2018-Ohio142, the Court issued a decision seemingly in conflict with the decision it issued roughly a year prior to Hurst in State v. Fillinger (2017), 72 N.E.3d. 671, 2016-Ohio-8455.
The Court in Fillinger held that a defendant was “confined”, as defined by the Ohio Revised Code, during the time he spent on electronic monitored house arrest (“EMHA”) following his conviction and therefore was entitled to jail time credit for those days served on EMHA. The Twelfth District, though, subsequently reversed itself in Hurst and determined that the defendant’s EMHA did not meet the definition of “confined” and thus her time served while on EMHA did not qualify for jail time credit.
In Hurst the Court focused on the fact that the defendant, while on EMHA, was permitted to leave her home to attend AA and NA meetings for nine hours a week, her cognitive intervention program for three hours a week, and to visit her probation officer one hour a week, as well as to attend her court hearings and for any medical emergencies. The defendant was also permitted to return to her previous residence in order to retrieve some of her belongings so that she could move to a new home. Since, in the opinion of the Court, the defendant’s freedom of movement was not restrained to the extent that she could not leave her home on her own volition coupled with the fact that she was actually permitted to leave her home for certain purposes, the Court found that she was not “confined” and therefore did not earn hail time credit while on EMHA. In reaching this decision, the Court discounted that a violation of her EMHA could result in a conviction for escape and/or a probation violation.
So, as it currently stands, defendants are not going to receive jail time credit for time served while on EMHA in the Twelfth District (Brown, Butler, Clermont, Clinton, Fayette, Madison, Preble and Warren Counties).