State v. Walker, 2014 Ohio 4841

In 2006 Gregory L. Walker was convicted of murder with firearm specifications and having a weapon while under disability; sentenced to 23 years to life and ordered to pay court costs.
Walker appealed his convictions; this court affirmed the convictions on direct appeal.
Walker later moved to vacate the court costs; the trial court denied that motion and this court affirmed, holding res judicata barred the challenge because costs could have been raised on direct appeal.
In January 2014 Walker moved for an order permitting the clerk of courts to set up a payment plan (he proposed paying $10/month and asked the clerk to stop DRC withholdings while the plan was in place).
The State opposed the motion and the trial court denied it; Walker appealed, asserting the court abused its discretion and the prosecutor had a duty to urge a payment plan.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the trial court abused its discretion by denying Walker's request to allow the clerk to establish a payment plan for court costs	The State argued the court had discretion and that Walker’s motion was barred by prior rulings/res judicata	Walker argued the court should permit a clerk-administered payment plan and direct the DRC to stop withholdings while plan was in place	Court: Denial affirmed; Walker’s claims barred by res judicata and the court was not required to create a payment plan
Whether the prosecutor had a duty under R.C. 309.08(A) to urge a payment plan	State: Prosecutor has no duty to advocate for a defendant or propose a payment plan	Walker: Prosecutor must "faithfully urge the collection" and thus should have urged a payment plan	Court: No such duty; statute does not require prosecutor to advocate on defendant’s behalf

(There were no key authorities in this opinion that have official reporter citations suitable for Bluebook form.)