State v. Mallory, 2020 Ohio 868

Antonio Mallory was indicted on multiple drug charges and pled guilty to two counts (illegal conveyance of drugs onto governmental facility; possession of cocaine) on December 21, 2018; other counts were nolled.
Sentenced March 21, 2019 to a total of nine months in prison; the court waived all fines but stated Mallory would be assessed the costs of prosecution; Mallory did not object or request a waiver at sentencing.
On March 27, 2019 Mallory filed a post‑sentencing motion to suspend/waive fines and costs, attaching an affidavit claiming indigency (no income, assets, or employment).
The trial court denied the motion on April 30, 2019, noting no fine was imposed but ordering Mallory to pay all court costs.
Mallory appealed, arguing the trial court abused its discretion by imposing court costs without considering or explaining his indigency.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the trial court abused its discretion by imposing court costs and denying Mallory's post‑sentencing motion to waive them	Mallory forfeited review by not requesting waiver at sentencing; court costs are statutorily mandated and appropriately imposed	Trial court abused its discretion by imposing costs without considering indigency or providing reasoning	Affirmed. Court costs are mandatory but waiver is discretionary; trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying waiver and was not required to make findings or consider ability to pay

State v. Beasley, 153 Ohio St.3d 497 (2018) (trial court has discretion to waive costs for indigent defendants)
State v. White, 103 Ohio St.3d 580 (2004) (trial court may assess court costs against an indigent felony defendant)
State v. Joseph, 125 Ohio St.3d 76 (2010) (court costs are mandatory under R.C. 2947.23(A))
State v. Clevenger, 114 Ohio St.3d 258 (2007) (court may waive costs but is not required to)
State v. Threatt, 108 Ohio St.3d 277 (2006) (abuse‑of‑discretion standard for sentencing review)