2018 Ohio 2922
Ohio Ct. App.2018Background
- Nathan Tilley was indicted for a third-degree felony (illegal possession/assembly of chemicals). He pleaded guilty and received five years of community control with costs ordered “within the term of his community control.”
- After an alleged community-control violation for consuming Oxycodone, Tilley appeared pro se, declined appointed counsel, pled guilty to the violation, and the court revoked community control, imposing a previously-advised 36-month prison term and ordering payment of costs within 60 days of release.
- The clerk issued a writ of execution the same day as the revocation sentence seeking collection of costs; the writ did not specify which costs were being collected.
- Tilley did not timely appeal the original July 2016 sentencing entry nor move to contest the August 2016 itemized bill for costs; he filed a delayed appeal from the November 2016 revocation judgment.
- The court of appeals reversed the revocation/sentence because the trial court failed to obtain a knowing, intelligent, and voluntary waiver of counsel, and it also vacated the premature writ of execution for costs.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether trial court obtained a knowing, intelligent, and voluntary waiver of counsel before accepting plea to community-control violation | State: waiver valid because defendant said he did not want appointed counsel and pled guilty | Tilley: waiver invalid—court failed to advise of right to retained counsel, did not obtain written waiver, and did not canvass dangers/defenses | Reversed: waiver invalid; trial court failed to substantially comply with Crim.R.32.3/44 and Faretta requirements |
| Whether trial court improperly imposed/collected subpoena-related costs from the underlying prosecution | Tilley: some subpoena costs were unauthorized and improperly assessed/collected | State: costs were part of original sentencing entry and collectible | Overruled on appeal: res judicata bars challenge to costs imposed in the original sentencing entry because Tilley did not timely appeal or move to modify |
| Whether clerk’s writ of execution to collect costs was proper the day of revocation sentencing | Tilley: writ was premature and issued without authority | State: writ authorized to attempt collection of costs from convicted person | Reversed: writ was premature because original entry gave multi-year period to pay and revocation entry ordered payment only after release; revocation entry also reversed |
| Appropriateness of assessing costs in revocation entry when not orally imposed at hearing | Tilley initially contested imposition of costs in revocation entry but withdrew this assignment at oral argument | — | Not addressed (withdrawn by appellant) |
Key Cases Cited
- Gibson v. United States, 45 Ohio St.2d 366 (judicial duty to thoroughly inquire before accepting waiver of counsel)
- Faretta v. California, 422 U.S. 806 (defendant must be made aware of dangers and disadvantages of self-representation)
- State v. Martin, 103 Ohio St.3d 385 (Ohio 2004) (written waiver rule and substantial-compliance review for serious offenses)
- State v. Brooke, 113 Ohio St.3d 199 (Ohio 2007) (waiver of counsel must be on the record and, for serious offenses, in writing)