State v. Skirvin
2019 Ohio 2040
Ohio Ct. App.2019Background
- Dakota Skirvin pled guilty to third-degree burglary and was placed on a two-year community-control term with standard/special conditions; the court also ordered a $250 fine, court costs, and court-appointed counsel fees.
- The sentencing entry stated the court reviewed the presentence investigation (PSI) and Skirvin’s present/future ability to pay, finding him employable and in good health.
- Nine months later the probation officer filed a notice alleging multiple community-control violations; Skirvin admitted probable cause and a hearing was held.
- The trial court found the violations, revoked community control, imposed a 30‑month prison term plus post-release control, and again ordered payment of the fine, costs, and court‑appointed counsel fees; the court instructed the clerk to provide DRC a certified copy of the total financial judgment.
- On appeal, the Second District sustained one assignment of error (procedural deficiency as to counsel-fee findings) and reversed/remanded only the portion of the sentence ordering payment of court‑appointed counsel fees; all other aspects of the judgment were affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the trial court properly imposed repayment of court‑appointed counsel fees without an explicit on‑the‑record finding of present or future ability to pay | County/State relied on trial court’s statements it reviewed the PSI and considered present/future ability to pay | Skirvin argued the court failed to make the required explicit finding and failed to specify the amount he could reasonably be expected to pay | Reversed as to counsel‑fee obligation: under controlling Second District precedent the court must make an explicit on‑the‑record ability‑to‑pay finding and specify the amount expected to be paid before imposing repayment of appointed‑counsel fees |
| Whether appoint‑counsel fees can be collected from an inmate account via R.C. 5120.133 / Ohio Adm.Code 5120‑5‑03 after judgment | State argued appointed‑counsel fees and court costs are civil obligations and may be collected from an inmate account using statutory/administrative procedures | Skirvin challenged blending counsel fees with costs for DRC collection | Affirmed: appointed‑counsel fees (once validly imposed/judgment entered) may be collected from an inmate account under R.C. 5120.133 and Ohio Adm.Code 5120‑5‑03; the court’s direction to the clerk to provide DRC a certified copy was not error |
Key Cases Cited
- Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (U.S. 1967) (framework for counsel‑appointed appellate briefs asserting no nonfrivolous issues)
- State v. Springs, 53 N.E.3d 804 (Ohio App. 2015) (appointed‑counsel fees are not taxed as costs; court must consider ability to pay)
- State v. Taylor, 111 N.E.3d 19 (Ohio 2018) (Second District precedent requiring an explicit on‑the‑record ability‑to‑pay finding and specification of amount before imposing appointed‑counsel fee repayment)
- State v. Threatt, 843 N.E.2d 164 (Ohio 2006) (department of rehabilitation and correction may deduct certified civil judgments from inmate accounts)
- State v. Crenshaw, 761 N.E.2d 1121 (Ohio App. 2001) (county’s reimbursement claim for appointed counsel must be prosecuted as a civil action)