State v. Hawley, 2014 Ohio 731

In 2007 Jamie Hawley was convicted in Montgomery County of aggravated burglary, attempted felonious assault, kidnapping, and grand theft; consecutive prison terms were imposed and the sentencing entry included an order to pay court costs though the court did not orally notify him at sentencing.
Hawley’s direct appeal was affirmed by this court in 2010 after supplemental briefing; appellate counsel had filed Anders briefs and this court reviewed a nonfrivolous suppression issue but ultimately affirmed convictions.
In March and May 2013 Hawley moved the trial court to vacate or suspend court costs (amounting to roughly $2,000–$2,500), arguing he had not been told at sentencing he would owe costs and asserting indigence.
The trial court denied the motions, finding Hawley had not sought a waiver at sentencing and concluding it lacked statutory authority to waive costs (but ordered $10 remain in his inmate account); Hawley did not appeal that ruling.
In August 2013 Hawley moved again, now alleging ineffective assistance of trial counsel for failing to request a waiver at sentencing; the trial court again denied relief and Hawley appealed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Hawley can challenge imposition of court costs because he was not orally notified at sentencing	Hawley: he is indigent, was not orally notified at sentencing, and counsel was ineffective for not seeking a waiver	State: costs are properly imposed and Hawley failed to raise the issue on direct appeal	Denied — res judicata bars the claim because it was or could have been raised on direct appeal
Whether the trial court had statutory authority to waive or suspend costs after sentencing	Hawley: court could and should waive costs given indigence and failure to notify	State: trial court lacked authority to waive after sentencing under prior law	Court: 2012 Sub.H.B. 247 and related statutes give trial courts post‑sentencing authority to waive, suspend, modify, or cancel costs, but trial court did not rely on them here
Whether the trial court abused its discretion by declining to waive costs even if authority existed	Hawley: denial was prejudicial and should be vacated	State: imposing costs is mandated under R.C. 2947.23 and waiver is discretionary	No abuse of discretion found; court properly required payment while protecting a $10 inmate account minimum

Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (U.S. 1967) (framework for counsel filing a brief asserting appeal is without merit)
State v. White, 103 Ohio St.3d 580 (Ohio 2004) (trial courts must impose costs of prosecution against convicted defendants)
State v. Joseph, 125 Ohio St.3d 76 (Ohio 2010) (trial court must orally notify defendant at sentencing if court costs are imposed)
State v. Lunsford, 193 Ohio App.3d 195 (Ohio Ct. App. 2011) (failure to orally impose costs at sentencing is not harmless and deprives defendant of opportunity to contest costs)
State v. Perry, 10 Ohio St.2d 175 (Ohio 1967) (res judicata bars claims that were or could have been raised on direct appeal)