State v. Braden
2017 Ohio 7903
| Ohio Ct. App. | 2017Background
- In 1998 David L. Braden was indicted on two counts of aggravated murder; he filed an affidavit of indigency and counsel was appointed.
- In 1999 a jury convicted Braden; the trial court sentenced him to death and imposed fines totaling $50,000 ($25,000 per count) and orally ordered court costs at sentencing.
- The sentencing entry (journalized) included the fines but did not list court costs; the criminal disposition sheet and oral pronouncement noted costs.
- Braden’s convictions and sentence were affirmed by the Ohio Supreme Court in 2003; his post-conviction petition was denied and that denial was affirmed on appeal.
- In 2016 Braden filed a post-judgment motion seeking waiver of fines and court costs and complaining that the prison/DRC was improperly withdrawing funds from his inmate account; the trial court denied the motion.
- On appeal Braden argued the trial court erred by not finding improper withdrawals and by refusing to waive the fines/costs; the Tenth District affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Braden may challenge imposition of fines post-judgment | State: fines were validly imposed and final | Braden: fine improper because he was indigent at sentencing | Denied — res judicata bars challenge to fines imposed and not raised on direct appeal |
| Whether trial court may waive or modify court costs after final judgment rendered pre-2013 R.C. 2947.23(C) | State: court lacks jurisdiction to alter costs after judgment final before 2013 amendment | Braden: court can waive costs and should do so | Denied — judgment became final in 2003; current R.C. 2947.23(C) does not apply retroactively; res judicata bars challenge |
| Whether omission of costs from sentencing entry precludes enforcement or res judicata | State: oral pronouncement and disposition sheet sufficiently imposed costs; costs are civil obligations | Braden: omission in journal entry prevents enforcement | Denied — oral pronouncement and disposition establish costs; res judicata still applies |
| Proper method to challenge prison/DRC collection from inmate account | State: collection procedures by warden/DRC not before the criminal court on post-judgment motion | Braden: motion should remedy allegedly improper withdrawals | Denied — must commence a separate civil action (Civ.R. 3(A)) or extraordinary relief to challenge collection procedures |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Braden, 98 Ohio St.3d 354 (affirming conviction and sentence)
- State v. Perry, 10 Ohio St.2d 175 (res judicata bars raising issues not raised on direct appeal)
- State v. Joseph, 125 Ohio St.3d 76 (a judgment for costs in a criminal case is a civil obligation)
- Strattman v. Studt, 20 Ohio St.2d 95 (costs are distinct from criminal punishment)