In Ohio, Amanda Heller remains accused of attempted aggravated murder despite no reported wounds in the April incident.
STRYKER, Ohio — An Ohio woman remained jailed after authorities said she broke into her ex-husband’s home, threatened to kill him and fired two rounds from a handgun in an incident that caused no reported injuries.
The lack of reported wounds is one of the sharpest details in the case, but it has not softened the charges facing Amanda S. Heller, 31, of Montpelier. Prosecutors secured a Williams County indictment that includes attempted aggravated murder, aggravated burglary and a firearm count tied to an occupied home. The case shows how alleged gunfire inside a residence can lead to major felony charges even when police reports do not describe anyone being struck.
Heller is being held at the Corrections Center of Northwest Ohio, a regional jail in Stryker. She was booked May 21 after an alleged April 26 incident at her former husband’s home in Williams County. The public reports reviewed do not say whether she was arrested at home, during a traffic stop, after a warrant was issued or under another circumstance. Jail records are public information but can change quickly. They do not decide guilt. Under the law, Heller is presumed innocent unless prosecutors prove the charges in court.
The first court account came through Bryan Municipal Court. A complaint alleged Heller entered the home while the man was sleeping. It said she threatened to kill him and fired two rounds from a handgun while inside the residence. The complaint made no mention of injuries. It also did not list other people in the home. WTOL identified the man as Heller’s ex-husband, though his name has not been released in the reports reviewed. Authorities have not publicly said whether the alleged victim was evaluated by medics or whether property inside the home was damaged by bullets.
That early case included felonious assault, and Heller’s bond was set at $100,000. The court also ordered her not to contact the alleged victim if she posted bond. No-contact orders are common in domestic cases and can be imposed while a criminal case is pending. They are not the same as a conviction. In this case, the order would bar direct or indirect contact with the man identified as her former spouse. The record reviewed does not say whether Heller sought a bond reduction or whether prosecutors asked for added release conditions.
The prosecution expanded when the case reached Williams County Common Pleas Court. A grand jury indicted Heller on four counts. The attempted aggravated murder charge alleges she tried to purposely, and with prior calculation and design, cause another person’s death. The aggravated burglary charge alleges she trespassed in an occupied structure while someone else was present, with the purpose to commit a criminal offense, and either inflicted, attempted to inflict or threatened to inflict physical harm. The firearm charge alleges a gun was knowingly discharged at or into a habitation or school safety zone. The domestic violence count alleges a family or household member feared physical harm.
The difference between no reported injuries and attempted aggravated murder may become a central issue as the case moves forward. Prosecutors do not have to show that a person died or was wounded to bring an attempt charge. They must instead prove intent and a substantial step toward the crime alleged. The indictment’s language about prior calculation and design points to the state’s theory that the alleged conduct was planned or purposeful rather than accidental. The defense may challenge that theory, the evidence supporting it or the meaning of the alleged statements and shots inside the home.
The case also turns on the home itself. Prosecutors charged aggravated burglary and improper firearm discharge because they say the incident happened inside or at an occupied structure used as a habitation. A home receives special treatment in criminal law because people are expected to be safe there, especially while sleeping. The complaint places the alleged victim in bed when Heller entered. It does not say how she got in, whether the door was locked, whether a key was used or whether there were signs of forced entry. Those facts could affect how jurors understand the burglary allegation if the case goes to trial.
Officials have released few details beyond the complaint and indictment. There has been no public explanation of a motive. The reports reviewed did not include the date of the former couple’s divorce, whether they had recent contact, whether police had responded to past disputes or whether any protective orders existed before April 26. They also did not say whether body camera footage, 911 audio, photographs, firearm testing or witness statements will become part of the court record. The lack of those details leaves the public account narrow: a home, a former husband, an alleged threat and two rounds fired.
Heller’s next reported step was a June 22 pretrial hearing at 2:30 p.m. in Williams County Common Pleas Court. A pretrial hearing can shape the case without resolving it. Lawyers may discuss evidence deadlines, possible plea talks, motions, bond issues or trial scheduling. The court may also revisit no-contact terms if either side raises them. The reports reviewed did not identify a defense attorney making a statement, and prosecutors have not publicly laid out their evidence beyond the charging language. Any later trial would require testimony and exhibits that have not yet been tested in open court.
The case stands as a pending Williams County prosecution with Heller in custody and the alleged victim protected by a no-contact condition if she is released. The next public measure of the case will come through common pleas filings after the scheduled pretrial hearing.
Author note: Last updated June 23, 2026.