State v. Leveck, 2021 Ohio 1547

On Jan. 17, 2020, Leveck and codefendants sold heroin; after the sale two victims were left on a roadside in Ohio; one later died and one survived hypothermia treatment.
Leveck was indicted on multiple drug and homicide-related counts; he pleaded not guilty and was appointed counsel as indigent.
Pursuant to a plea agreement, Leveck pled guilty to attempted felonious assault (amended) and complicity to commit aggravated possession of drugs, agreed to testify for the state, and the remaining counts were dismissed.
At sentencing the court imposed consecutive prison terms: 11 months (drug complicity) + 30 months (attempted felonious assault) = 41 months aggregate.
The court ordered $5,999.28 restitution (funeral expenses), costs of prosecution, and appointed-counsel fees.
Leveck appealed, raising two issues: (1) trial court erred in imposing consecutive sentences; (2) trial court imposed financial sanctions without considering his ability to pay.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether trial court lawfully imposed consecutive sentences under R.C. 2929.14(C)(4)	The court made the required statutory findings at the sentencing hearing and incorporated them in the entry; consecutive terms were justified.	The court failed to make the necessary R.C. 2929.14(C)(4) findings and improperly weighed R.C. 2929.11/2929.12 factors such that the aggregate sentence is disproportionate.	Affirmed. Court expressly made the R.C. 2929.14(C)(4) findings at hearing and in the entry; appellate review limited to those findings, and no clear-and-convincing error shown.
Whether court erred by imposing costs, appointed-counsel fees, and restitution without considering ability to pay	Costs of prosecution are mandatory; appointed-counsel fees and restitution were permissible because the court reviewed the PSI (which contained financial information) before sentencing.	The trial court did not consider present/future ability to pay; indigency at arraignment shows inability to pay.	Affirmed. Costs of prosecution are mandatory; appointment fees and restitution were not plain error because the PSI provided evidence the court considered ability to pay and indigency for counsel does not automatically preclude later financial sanctions.

State v. Beasley, 153 Ohio St.3d 497, 2018-Ohio-493, 108 N.E.3d 1028 (Ohio 2018) (trial court must make three statutory findings under R.C. 2929.14(C)(4) and state them at sentencing and in the entry to impose consecutive terms)
State v. Bonnell, 140 Ohio St.3d 209, 2014-Ohio-3177, 16 N.E.3d 659 (Ohio 2014) (same requirement that findings be made on the record and included in the sentencing entry)
State v. Gwynn, 158 Ohio St.3d 279, 2019-Ohio-4761, 141 N.E.3d 169 (Ohio 2019) (appellate review of consecutive sentences is confined to whether the record supports the R.C. 2929.14(C)(4) findings)