Reagan Tokes: The Ohio Sentencing Law and Its Constitutional Test

The Reagan Tokes Act is an Ohio sentencing reform law, signed as Senate Bill 201 in December 2018 and effective March 22, 2019, that replaced fixed prison terms for first- and second-degree felonies with an indefinite range: a judge-imposed minimum plus an automatic maximum set 50 percent higher.¹² The Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction can hold an inmate past the minimum for serious misconduct, and can recommend shaving five to fifteen percent off the minimum for exceptional behavior.³

The Murder Behind the Law

Reagan Tokes was a 21-year-old Ohio State psychology student. On February 8, 2017, she was abducted leaving her restaurant shift in the Short North neighborhood of Columbus, forced to withdraw cash, raped, and shot to death. Her body was found at Scioto Grove Metro Park in Grove City.⁴⁵

Her killer, Brian Golsby, was 29 and on parole. He had pleaded guilty in 2011 to attempted rape and robbery, served six years, and racked up more than 50 institutional infractions across five prison transfers. Ohio’s truth-in-sentencing rules at the time required his release when the definite term ended, no matter how he had behaved inside. He walked out on November 13, 2016.⁶⁷

Golsby was wearing a GPS ankle monitor when he killed Tokes. Data from that device later tied him to six armed robberies in the weeks before the murder. In March 2018 a Franklin County jury convicted him of aggravated murder, kidnapping, rape, aggravated robbery, and tampering with evidence, and the trial court imposed life without parole plus 105 years.⁸⁹ The gap the case exposed — an inmate with a violent record and dozens of prison infractions released automatically at the end of a fixed term — became the target of the legislative response.

How Sentencing Works Under the Act

For qualifying first- and second-degree felonies committed on or after March 22, 2019, a judge no longer picks a single fixed prison term. The judge picks a minimum term from the statutory range, and the maximum is set by formula: minimum plus 50 percent of the minimum. A four-year minimum yields a four-to-six-year sentence. An eight-year minimum yields eight to twelve. The range travels with the offender into prison.³

The law starts from a presumption of release at the minimum. What the Department of Rehabilitation and Correction can do is rebut that presumption and keep the person past the minimum, up to the maximum, based on how the sentence has played out behind the wall.¹⁰

When Time Can Be Added

To hold someone past the minimum, the DRC must run a hearing and find one or more of the following: serious institutional rule violations, placement in extended restrictive housing within the past year, or a security classification of level three or higher. Beyond identifying those factors, the department must conclude that they demonstrate the offender has not been rehabilitated and remains a threat to society. Any added time cannot push the total past the statutory maximum.¹⁰

When Time Can Be Reduced

The other direction is meant to reward rehabilitation. The DRC may recommend that the sentencing court reduce the minimum term by five to fifteen percent for “exceptional conduct or adjustment to incarceration.” The recommendation triggers a hearing before the judge, who is presumed to grant the reduction unless there are specific reasons to refuse it. People convicted of sexually oriented offenses cannot receive this reduction.³

The Constitutional Challenge

Because the department, not the sentencing judge, decides whether time gets added, incarcerated people argued that the statute violated the separation of powers, the right to a jury trial, and due process. The Ohio Supreme Court took up the question in the consolidated cases State v. Hacker and State v. Simmons.

On July 26, 2023, the court ruled 5-2 that the law is not facially unconstitutional. Justice Joseph Deters, writing for the majority, reasoned that the trial court sets the full range at sentencing, so the department’s power to keep someone within that range does not usurp the judiciary’s role or take a jury question from a jury. On due process, the majority pointed to the statute’s hearing requirement and held that the challengers had not shown the law could never be applied fairly.¹¹

Justice Jennifer Brunner, joined by Justice Michael Donnelly, dissented. The dissent said the hearings the law provides lack adequate protections such as the right to counsel, the ability to confront witnesses, and meaningful standards, and that the DRC ends up acting as both prosecutor and judge when it adds time.¹¹ Three months later, on October 26, 2023, the court resolved 155 pending companion cases, affirming the law in 152 of them and dismissing three as improvidently accepted.¹²

How the Law Has Worked in Practice

By the end of 2024, more than 14,500 people had been sentenced under the Reagan Tokes Law, roughly a third of Ohio’s prison population. A review by the Marshall Project published in April 2025 found that the reward side of the statute has not operated at all: no one has received an early release, and the DRC has denied all of the more than 120 petitions filed by incarcerated people seeking a shorter minimum term.¹³

The extension side has been active. About 700 people a year have been denied release at the minimum because of added time, producing roughly 830 additional years of incarceration cumulatively at a cost the Marshall Project put at about $32 million. Black men, less than seven percent of Ohio’s population, account for 59 percent of those given additional prison time under the law.¹³

The disciplinary process that drives extensions does not carry courtroom protections. Individuals facing those proceedings do not have the right to an attorney, cannot question accusers, and lack access to the evidence used against them. There is no external audit of the department’s decisions to add time, and elected judges have no role in investigating the underlying rule violations.¹³

Critics have voiced these concerns since the bill’s passage. The ACLU of Ohio warned in 2018 that the law would “dramatically increase our prison population by hundreds per year.” Matthew Ahn of the Ohio Justice and Policy Center called it “just another accelerator toward runaway incarceration” and “runaway spending on corrections.” Defense attorney Andrew Mayle said, “When you give this kind of unchecked power to people, it’s going to be abused.” Nicole Clum, formerly of the Ohio Public Defender’s office, called the law “more stick than carrot,” arguing that without a real path to early release, people inside have no incentive to engage in programming.¹⁴

What the Original Act Did Not Fix

The Reagan Tokes Act changed how sentences are structured. It did not change how the state monitors people it has already released. Golsby’s ankle monitor had been streaming near-real-time location data that no one was checking, and a wrongful death suit filed by the Tokes family alleged that parole officers never configured the system to flag curfew violations, weapons possession, or presence in unauthorized areas. Golsby had violated parole at least three times and tampered with the device before the murder.⁴¹⁵

Reagan’s mother, Lisa McCrary-Tokes, kept pushing for a monitoring bill. An earlier version requiring continuous monitoring passed the Ohio House in 2022 but stalled in the Senate.¹⁶ The effort gained new momentum after the June 4, 2025, killing of Patrick Heringer, a 46-year-old Cincinnati gym owner and veteran, stabbed in his Over-the-Rhine home. The man charged with the killing, Mordecia Black, had been released from prison in January 2025, cut off his ankle monitor a month later, and remained at large despite a warrant issued in May 2025.¹⁷

State Representative Cindy Abrams introduced House Bill 667 in January 2026 as the Reagan Tokes and Patrick Heringer Act. It would require the DRC to contract with a single vendor for continuous, real-time GPS tracking supporting inclusion and exclusion zones, curfew monitoring, and a crime scene correlation program. Warrants for tier one offenses or detention violations would have to be entered into the LEADS and NCIC databases within 48 hours of issuance, with 911 call centers notified on the same timeline. Judges would gain increased discretion to return repeat or problem offenders to prison. The Ohio House passed HB 667 on June 10, 2026, and it moved to the Ohio Senate.¹⁸

1
ABC6 On Your Side. Governor Kasich Signs Part of Reagan Tokes Act Into Law
2
Ohio Legislature. Senate Bill 201
3
Supreme Court of Ohio. SB 201 Reference Guide
4
The Columbus Dispatch. Family of Reagan Tokes Sues State
5
NBC4i. Murder of OSU Student Reagan Tokes on Dateline
6
The Lantern. Records: Reagan Tokes Suspect Previously Convicted of Robbery, Attempted Rape
7
NBC4i. Legislator Wants Changes to Sentencing and Parole Laws After Murder of OSU Student
8
Ohio House of Representatives. Legislators Announce Reagan Tokes Act
9
Supreme Court of Ohio. State v. Golsby, 2020-Ohio-4651
10
Supreme Court of Ohio. 2025 Indefinite Sentencing Reference Guide
11
Court News Ohio. State v. Hacker and State v. Simmons
12
Court News Ohio. Hacker-Simmons Companion Cases
13
The Marshall Project. Ohio Reagan Tokes Law Sentencing Reform
14
The Marshall Project. Ohio Reagan Tokes Senate Bill 201
15
The Lantern. Ohio Bill Aims to Fix GPS Monitoring Failures Eight Years After Ohio State Student’s Murder
16
WDTN. Incoming Ohio Bill Seeks to Require Real-Time Monitoring of Parolees’ GPS Ankle Bracelets
17
WCPO. Wife of Gym Owner Killed in Over-the-Rhine Seeks Justice
18
Ohio House of Representatives. Ohio House Passes Reagan Tokes and Patrick Heringer Act