ability to seek waiver (Ohio) · Go Syfert
← Ohio issues

ability to seek waiver in Ohio

10 Ohio opinions name it 2 courts 2016–2024 1 in the last five years

The cases below were cited by Ohio courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.

Followed or applied (2)

CaseFollowedCited
State v. Williamsgreen
ohioctapp · 2014 · cited in 2 Ohio opinions naming this issue, 2016–2018
2 sentences

2018Auglaize No. 2-13-31, 2014-Ohio-4425, ¶ 17 (determining that any error trial counsel made by failing to object to costs at sentencing not prejudicial when appellant retained the ability to seek waiver under court’s continuing jurisdiction granted in R.C. 2947.23(c); see State v. Walker, 4th Dist.

2016SCIOTO, 15CA3717 19 Auglaize No. 2-13-31, 2014-Ohio-4425, ¶17 (determining that any error trial counsel made by failing to object to costs at sentencing not prejudicial when appellant retained the ability to seek waiver under court’s continuing jurisdiction granted in R.C. 2947.23(C)).

22
State v. Thompsongreen
ohioctapp · 2020 · cited in 1 Ohio opinions naming this issue, 2024–2024
1 sentence

2024Allen No. 1-19-30, 2020-Ohio-723, ¶ 21 (no manifest miscarriage of justice when appellant retained “the ability to seek waiver, suspension, or modification of the payment of the costs of prosecution in this case”). {¶32} Accordingly, based upon the foregoing reasons, we overrule, in part, and sustain, in part, appellant’s first SCIOTO 22CA4000 & 22CA4001 18 assignment of error consistent with our opinion.

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Ohio. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (2)

CaseCitedYears
State v. Springer neutral
ohioctapp · 2017
2 sentences

2020Therefore, considering only the effect of R.C. 2947.23(C), the 11 SUPREME COURT OF OHIO appellate court created a per se rule, holding that trial counsel’s failure to file a motion to waive court costs at the time of a defendant’s sentencing hearing could never constitute prejudice in an ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claim because the defendant is able to file a motion to waive court costs at any time after sentencing. {¶ 28} Similar to the Fifth District’s analysis, the Eighth District’s ineffective-assistance-of-counsel analysis in Springer also focused on the prejudice prong: “As to Spr

2019Cuyahoga No. 104649, 2017-Ohio-8861 .

52018–2020
State v. Joseph green
ohio · 2010
2 sentences

2017In State v. Joseph, 125 Ohio St.3d 76 , 2010-Ohio-954 , 926 N.E.2d 278, ¶ 22-24 , the Ohio Supreme Court held that the failure to orally notify the defendant that it was imposing court costs denied the defendant the ability to seek a waiver of the costs.

2017In State v. Joseph, 125 Ohio St.3d 76 , 2010-Ohio-954 , 926 N.E.2d 278, ¶ 22-24 , the Ohio Supreme Court held that the failure to orally notify the defendant that it was imposing court costs denied the defendant the ability to seek a waiver of the costs.

22017–2017

Statutes the citing opinions construe

OH § Ohio Rev. Code § 2947.23 (9) OH § Ohio Rev. Code § 2947.231 (3)

Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check