defendant during the sentencing hearing in Ohio

2020The trial court did not mention court costs during the sentencing hearing before imposing them in the entry. [The defendant] cites State v. Joseph, 125 Ohio St.3d 76 , 2010- Ohio-954, 926 N.E.2d 278 , for the proposition that it is error for a trial court to impose court costs in its sentencing entry without first informing the defendant during the sentencing hearing of its intent to do so.

2020The trial court did not mention court costs during the sentencing hearing before imposing them in the entry. [The defendant] cites State v. Joseph, 125 Ohio St.3d 76 , 2010- Ohio-954, 926 N.E.2d 278 , for the proposition that it is error for a trial court to impose court costs in its sentencing entry without first informing the defendant during the sentencing hearing of its intent to do so.

2019State v. Clevenger , 114 Ohio St.3d 258 , 2007-Ohio-4006 , 871 N.E.2d 589 , ¶ 4. {¶8} Appellant cites State v. Joseph , 125 Ohio St.3d 76 , 2010-Ohio-954 , 926 N.E.2d 278 , for the proposition that it is error for a trial court to impose court costs in its sentencing entry without first informing the defendant during the sentencing hearing of its intent to do so.

2019State v. Beasley, 153 Ohio St.3d 497 , 2018-Ohio-493 , 108 N.E.3d 1028, ¶ 263 . {¶ 11} Abandoning Joseph as a foundation for this case, appellant next declares that R.C. 2947.23 explicitly grants jurisdiction to the trial court “To waive, suspend or modify the payment of costs of prosecution at the time of sentencing, or any time thereafter.” That section states: “(C) The court retains jurisdiction to waive, suspend, or modify the payment of the costs of prosecution, including any costs under section 2947.231 of the Revised Code, at the time of sentencing or at any time thereafter.” {¶ 12} For

2019State v. Beasley, 153 Ohio St.3d 497 , 2018-Ohio-493 , 108 N.E.3d 1028, ¶ 263 . {¶ 11} Abandoning Joseph as a foundation for this case, appellant next declares that R.C. 2947.23 explicitly grants jurisdiction to the trial court “To waive, suspend or modify the payment of costs of prosecution at the time of sentencing, or any time thereafter.” That section states: “(C) The court retains jurisdiction to waive, suspend, or modify the payment of the costs of prosecution, including any costs under section 2947.231 of the Revised Code, at the time of sentencing or at any time thereafter.” {¶ 12} For

2017State v. Davis, 116 Ohio St.3d 404 , 2008-Ohio-2 , 880 N.E.2d 31 . “[T]he presence of a defendant is a condition of due process to the extent that a fair and just hearing would be thwarted by his absence, and to that extent only.” Id.

2017State v. Davis , 116 Ohio St.3d 404 , 2008-Ohio-2 , 880 N.E.2d 31 . "[T]he presence of a defendant is a condition of due process to the extent that a fair and just hearing would be thwarted by his absence, and to that extent only." Id.