Background
Angie McIntire was charged in two cases with drug-related offenses, driving offenses, possessing criminal tools, and a forfeiture specification. She pleaded guilty to aggravated possession of drugs, driving under an OVI suspension, and possessing criminal tools in the first case, and to aggravated possession of drugs in the second.
The Ashland County Court of Common Pleas imposed an aggregate 24-month prison term under the parties’ agreement. Although the court waived McIntire’s mandatory fines, it ordered her to pay court costs. McIntire did not object at sentencing but argued on appeal that imposing costs was contrary to law and an abuse of discretion because she was indigent and incarcerated.
The Court’s Holding
The Fifth District affirmed. Because McIntire did not object at sentencing, the court reviewed the imposition of costs only for plain error. Under R.C. 2947.23(A)(1)(a), courts must impose prosecution costs on convicted defendants, including those who are indigent.
Although R.C. 2947.23(C) permits a trial court to waive, suspend, or modify costs, it does not require the court to consider a defendant’s ability to pay. McIntire’s indigency, the waiver of her mandatory fines, and her prison sentence therefore did not establish that the trial court plainly erred by imposing costs.
Key Takeaways
- A defendant’s failure to object to court costs at sentencing limits appellate review to plain error.
- Ohio courts must impose prosecution costs on convicted defendants regardless of indigency, though they retain discretion to waive, suspend, or modify those costs.
- McIntire may still ask the trial court to waive, suspend, or modify her costs because the court retains jurisdiction to grant that relief at any time.
Why It Matters
The decision reinforces that indigency and incarceration do not, by themselves, make an award of court costs unlawful in Ohio. It also highlights the distinction between mandatory fines, which the trial court waived here, and prosecution costs, which the court was statutorily directed to impose.
Defendants who do not seek relief from costs at sentencing are not necessarily foreclosed from obtaining it later, but a direct appeal without a preserved objection faces the demanding plain-error standard.