State v. Martin
Citations
- 2021 Ohio 4213
Syllabus
Court costs, res judicata, successive similar motions, R.C. 2947.23. Under R.C. 2947.23, trial courts retain jurisdiction to review or modify orders requiring offenders to pay court costs. However, appellant's argument that he should be relieved from the trial court's order requiring him to pay court costs is barred by res judicata. Appellant moved the trial court in 2018 to vacate court costs. Subsequently, appellant filed another motion in 2020 seeking to vacate court costs, asserting for the first time that the court's order went dormant in 2016, which was denied. Because appellant could have raised the dormancy argument in his 2018 motion, he is barred by res judicata from raising it in a successive similar motion in 2020.
Judges: Forbes
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
5 cases in this archive cite this case.
Cites
6 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- Grava v. Parkman TownshipOhio Supreme Court· 1995-08-30· cited 1,323×
- Grava v. Parkman Twp.Ohio Supreme Court· 1995-08-30· cited 440×
- Coulson v. CoulsonOhio Supreme Court· 1983-05-18· cited 232×
- Bank of New York v. JacksonOhio Court of Appeals· 2013-11-21· cited 9×
- State ex rel. Martin v. Russo (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court· 2020-03-10· cited 7×
- State v. SandsOhio Court of Appeals· 2021-03-08· cited 4×
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.