State v. Veal
2013 Ohio 1577
Ohio Ct. App.2013Background
- Veal pled guilty to a second-degree felony (felonious assault) and was sentenced by agreement to two years in prison with court costs to be paid.
- Veal appealed, arguing the trial court did not consider his ability to pay court costs and failed to notify him of consequences if he did not pay.
- The trial court must impose court costs under R.C. 2947.23 and notify defendant at sentencing under State v. Joseph; indigence can lead to waiver if sought.
- Court costs are civil in nature, not punishment, and need not be conditioned on the defendant’s ability to pay under R.C. 2929.19.
- Record showed Veal was indigent but had minimal information about his future ability to pay; no pre-sentence investigation was conducted due to the plea agreement.
- The court later held that the failure to notify about community service violated R.C. 2947.23 as it existed, and the judgment was modified to eliminate a requirement of community service in lieu of costs.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the trial court erred by imposing costs without evaluating ability to pay | Veal: no consideration of ability to pay | Veal: rights under R.C. 2947.23 require such consideration | First assignment overruled |
| Whether the trial court failed to notify about potential community service for nonpayment | State: notice required at sentencing | Veal: not notified of possible community service | Second assignment sustained; judgment modified to remove community service requirement |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. White, 103 Ohio St.3d 580 (2004-Ohio-5989) (costs mandatory despite indigence; costs treated as civil judgment)
- State v. Joseph, 125 Ohio St.3d 76 (2010-Ohio-954) (courts must notify at sentencing about costs; indigence waiver available on request)
- State v. Smith, 2007-Ohio-6552 (3d Dist. Allen No. 1-07-32) (costs not punishment; not require R.C. 2929.19 analysis)
- State v. Blessing, 2013-Ohio-392 (2d Dist. Clark No. 2011 CA 56) (discussion of costs and indigence considerations)
- State v. Threatt, 108 Ohio St.3d 277 (2006-Ohio-905) (costs are civil, not criminal punishment; costs as judgment)
- State v. Lunsford, 93 Ohio App.3d 195 (2011-Ohio-964) (record may include future ability to pay in determining waiver)
- State v. Parson, 2013-Ohio-1069 (2d Dist. Montgomery No. 25123) (remand for instruction or modification on costs/CS requirements)
- State v. Ellis, 2008-Ohio-2719 (2d Dist. Montgomery No. 22189) (community service/costs interplay; no imprisonment for civil nonpayment)
- State v. Daugherty, 2006-Ohio-240 (2d Dist. Montgomery No. 20779) (addressed failure to perform CS as contempt/violation of costs)