State v. McWay, 2020 Ohio 719

Ross M. McWay was convicted of aggravated murder in 2017 and sentenced to life without parole; this court affirmed on direct appeal.
On September 23, 2019, McWay filed a pro se post-judgment motion to “vacate” (waive/suspend/modify) court costs; the trial court denied the motion the same day.
The trial court concluded McWay has a present or future ability to pay because incarcerated persons can earn wages under Ohio Admin. Code 5120-3-05.
McWay appealed, arguing the trial court never assessed his assets, education, employment history, or ability to pay at sentencing.
The appellate court reviewed the denial for abuse of discretion and affirmed, finding the trial court properly exercised its discretion under R.C. 2947.23(C).

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the trial court erred in denying McWay’s post-judgment motion to waive/suspend/modify court costs	State: trial court properly exercised discretion and need not automatically waive costs; may consider ability to pay including future prison wages	McWay: court failed to assess ability to pay (assets, education, employment) and imposed costs despite life-without-parole sentence	Affirmed: denial upheld—trial court considered ability to pay (noting potential prison wages) and did not abuse its discretion

State v. Clinton, 153 Ohio St.3d 422 (2017) (R.C. 2947.23 requires assessment of costs against criminal defendants)
State v. Threatt, 108 Ohio St.3d 277 (2006) (standard: appellate review of post-judgment cost-waiver decisions is abuse of discretion)
State v. Taylor, 153 Ohio St.3d 1467 (2018) (Supreme Court addressing what trial courts must consider when ruling on post-judgment motions to waive/suspend/modify costs)