Case Citator › State v. Threatt

State v. Threatt

Is it still good law? What later courts have actually done to this case.

Superseded by statute
Court
Supreme Court of Ohio
Citation
108 Ohio St. 3d 277
Decided
Confirmed treatments
3
Flagged citations read
33 of 33
Citing cases (total)
33
Treatment dates
2017–2019
Superseded by statute
A reviewed court treats this case as superseded by later legislation. Superseded by statute as to when a defendant may request waiver of court costs. All 33 flagged citations have been read.
More on how this was screened

R.C. 2947.23(C) permits a court to waive costs after sentencing, displacing State v. Threatt's sentencing time limit. The Ohio Supreme Court confirmed that change in State v. Braden. Threatt's holdings on collecting costs and the finality of a sentencing entry are not displaced by the decisions listed below.

Every treatment on this page is written from the citing opinion itself, with a verbatim quote, never copied from a commercial citator. A citation flagged by our screen but not shown here was read and found not to weaken this case.

33 later cases cite State v. Threatt; 33 of those citations sat close to treatment language and were flagged for reading, and all of them have been read. Citations that did not sit near treatment language were not flagged and were not read one by one, so a court that weakened this case without using any of that language would not appear here.

Relying on State v. Threatt?

This page shows what later courts did to it. Ask about your specific facts and see whether it still carries your argument, with citations you can check.

Treatments

Superseded by statute

  • The Eighth District held that the 2013 amendment to R.C. 2947.23 superseded Threatt's requirement to seek a cost waiver at sentencing.

    State v. Black · Court of Appeals of Ohio, Eighth Appellate District · filed

    Initially, we respectfully disagree with the state’s argument and note that Threatt has been superseded by statute.
    Read the full opinion on CourtListener →

  • The Eighth District held that defendants may request a cost waiver after sentencing under R.C. 2947.23(C), despite Threatt's earlier deadline.

    State v. Jones · Court of Appeals of Ohio, Eighth Appellate District · filed

    State v. Threatt, 108 Ohio St.3d 277, 2006-Ohio-905, 843 N.E.2d 164, ¶ 23. ... We note, however, that there are no longer limits on when a defendant can move for waiver of court costs. ... Therefore, Jones may move for waiver of the payment of court costs at any time.
    Read the full opinion on CourtListener →

  • The Ohio Supreme Court held that R.C. 2947.23(C) creates an exception to Threatt's sentencing deadline and res judicata rule, even for costs imposed before the amendment.

    State v. Braden · Supreme Court of Ohio · filed

    At first blush, our decisions in Threatt and Clevenger appear harmful to Braden’s position because they say that if a defendant does not move for waiver at sentencing, he loses his ability to do so and further consideration of the issue is foreclosed by principles of res judicata. ... To that end, the statute specifically provides an exception to res judicata when a defendant did not request waiver at sentencing or challenge his court costs on direct appeal.
    Read the full opinion on CourtListener →

Does this case still carry your argument?

Describe your facts. Ezel reads State v. Threatt and the cases that treated it, then tells you whether it still holds for your situation, with citations.

Opens in Ezel Pro.

  • Checks the law as it stands today, not only this page
  • Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
  • Chat, drafting and research in one workspace