State v. Hicks
2017 Ohio 8312
| Ohio Ct. App. | 2017Background
- Robert Hicks pleaded guilty to involuntary manslaughter (first-degree felony with a three-year firearm specification) and attempted aggravated robbery (second-degree felony).
- At sentencing the court imposed an aggregate prison term of 17 years and five years of mandatory postrelease control.
- Hicks was found indigent at sentencing; defense counsel asked the court to waive court costs.
- The trial court nonetheless entered judgment for court costs and ordered Hicks to perform community work service “in lieu of paying costs,” and indicated any remaining costs could be paid during postrelease control.
- Hicks appealed, arguing (1) the court abused its discretion by imposing costs without a record-based finding that he can pay, and (2) the court improperly ordered community work service after a prison term because community work service is a community-control sanction.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (State) | Defendant's Argument (Hicks) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the trial court improperly imposed court costs despite Hicks’s indigency | R.C. 2947.23 requires assessment of court costs in all criminal cases; a defendant’s indigency does not prevent assessment and the court may later collect from inmate accounts | Court abused its discretion by imposing costs without a record-supported finding that Hicks has or will have ability to pay | Trial court did not err: assessment of costs is mandatory under R.C. 2947.23 and ability to pay is not a prerequisite; court properly exercised discretion and could require collection during incarceration or after release |
| Whether ordering community work service “after” a 17-year prison term was an improper imposition of a post-prison community-control sanction | Community work service was ordered in connection with paying costs and not as a nonresidential community-control sanction | Community work service is a community-control sanction and cannot be imposed to run after a prison term | Trial court did not impose community work service as a nonresidential community-control sanction; Anderson (Eighth Dist.) is inapplicable; order upheld |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Clevenger, 114 Ohio St.3d 258, 871 N.E.2d 589 (2007) (defendant’s financial status is irrelevant to the court’s duty to assess costs under R.C. 2947.23)
- State v. White, 103 Ohio St.3d 580, 817 N.E.2d 393 (2004) (trial court must include prosecution costs in sentence and render judgment for costs even if defendant is indigent)
- State v. Threatt, 108 Ohio St.3d 277, 843 N.E.2d 164 (2006) (court retains jurisdiction to collect from incarcerated defendants; certain statutory collection mechanisms are permissible)
- Strattman v. Studt, 20 Ohio St.2d 95, 253 N.E.2d 749 (1969) (costs lighten taxpayers’ burden; costs are akin to civil judgments rather than punishment)