2013 Ohio 1062
Ohio Ct. App.2013Background
- State appeals a trial court judgment dismissing a DUI case against Pettygrove without prejudice and assesses court costs against the Prosecuting Attorney's office.
- Trial court handwritten a note that all costs were to be paid by the P.A. after dismissal on February 14, 2012.
- Appellant sought review arguing the trial court lacked authority to assess costs against the State.
- This court previously addressed a similar issue in Hicks, holding court costs are a civil obligation arising from implied contract.
- The opinion distinguishes Songer and Christian as inapplicable to the case at hand, and relies on general authority that costs may be taxed against the State in appropriate circumstances.
- Court sustains the trial court’s cost assessment, overrules the assignment of error, and affirms the judgment.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| May the State be ordered to pay court costs after dismissal of the prosecution? | Pettygrove | Pettygrove | Yes; costs may be taxed against the State |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Hicks, 2012-Ohio-3831 (4th Dist. 2012) (court costs are a civil obligation arising from implied contract)
- State v. Songer, 2004-Ohio-1281 (5th Dist. 2004) (distinguishes indigent fees and jury fees from general costs)
- State v. Christian, 2005-Ohio-905 (7th Dist. 2005) (similar to Songer on costs; distinguishable in this context)
- Strattman v. Studt, 20 Ohio St.2d 95 (1969) (costs as a statutory-syllabus basis for civil obligation)
- State v. Joseph, 125 Ohio St.3d 76 (2010) (costs are a civil obligation; supports taxation of costs)