State v. Thompson
2013 Ohio 3200
Ohio Ct. App.2013Background
- Thompson, indigent, was indicted on multiple counts including aggravated murder; plea agreement reducedCount 1 to voluntary manslaughter and dismissed others; sentenced to 14 years total with costs and attorney fees assessed; trial court noted costs to be paid and forfeitures ordered; Thompson moved to waive costs arguing lack of ability to pay under R.C. 2929.19(B)(5); motion denied; no transcript provided for sentencing review; issue preserved only if motion raised at sentencing; final sentencing entry included costs but not fines; appeal alleges abuse of discretion and indigency considerations not addressed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the trial court properly considered Thompson’s ability to pay before imposing costs | Thompson—indigent—costs should be waived under 2929.19(B)(5) | State—costs authorized by statute; court need not expressly state consideration but must review ability to pay | Yes; court considered ability to pay; denial affirmed |
| Whether an indigent defendant can be compelled to pay court costs when indemnification was not expressly waived at sentencing | Thompson contends costs improper if indigent; should have been waived at sentencing | Costs authorized; no express waiver required if properly reviewed later; res judicata if not appealed timely | Costs may be assessed against indigent; denial of waiver upheld; appeal denied |
| Whether the appeal is barred by res judicata due to failure to appeal the sentencing judgment | Motion filed post-sentencing should be reviewable | Untimely post-sentencing appeal; res judicata applies | Motion untimely; res judicata; assignment of error overruled |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Threatt, 108 Ohio St.3d 277 (2006-Ohio-905) (indigency and costs reviewed under abuse-of-discretion; costs are not fines but civil-like judgments)
- State v. Edwards, 2013-Ohio-1922 (2d Dist. No. 2012-CA-49) (court may infer consideration of ability to pay; no express finding required)
- State v. Hodge, 2011-Ohio-633 (2d Dist. Montgomery No. 23964) (no required explicit finding; trial court must consider ability to pay)
- State v. Parker, 2004-Ohio-1313 (2d Dist. Champaign No. 03CA0017) (consideration of ability to pay not expressly required to be stated)
- State v. Lewis, 2012-Ohio-4858 (2d Dist. No. 2011–CA–75) (ability to pay may be inferred from record)
- White, 103 Ohio St.3d 580 (2004-Ohio-) (costs are not punishment; indigent waiver possible; costs must be included in sentencing entry)
- State v. Haynie, 157 Ohio App.3d 708 (2004-Ohio-2452) (costs may be assessed to enable future collection if indigence status changes)
- Strattman v. Studt, 20 Ohio St.2d 95 (1969) (costs are for lightening taxpayers’ burden, akin to civil judgment)