State v. Stapleton, 2020 Ohio 852

Stapleton pleaded guilty to murder and burglary and no-contest to a repeat violent-offender specification; convictions entered September 6, 2017.
Sentenced to an aggregate term of 25 years to life; the trial court ordered Stapleton to pay court costs as part of the sentence.
Stapleton’s direct appeal was dismissed under Anders on February 7, 2018.
Stapleton filed multiple motions (April 2018, April 2019, September 2019) to vacate, suspend, or modify the court costs; the trial court denied each motion.
Stapleton appealed the denials, arguing the trial court erred by imposing court costs without assessing his ability to pay.
The Third District affirmed, concluding the claim was barred by res judicata and, on the merits, that R.C. 2947.23 mandates court costs without an ability-to-pay inquiry.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the trial court erred by imposing court costs without assessing Stapleton’s ability to pay	The State: res judicata bars the challenge; R.C. 2947.23 requires court costs be included in sentence regardless of ability to pay	Stapleton: court must determine ability to pay before imposing costs because he is indigent	Affirmed. Issue barred by res judicata; on the merits R.C. 2947.23 mandates court costs without an ability-to-pay hearing; courts retain post-sentencing discretion to waive/suspend/modify costs.

Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967) (procedural standard for appointed counsel’s no-merit direct appeals)
State v. Szefcyk, 77 Ohio St.3d 93 (1996) (res judicata bars issues raised or that could have been raised on direct appeal)