Case Name: The State of Ohio, Appellant, v. Cantwell, Appellee
Court: Supreme Court of Ohio
Jurisdiction: Ohio
Decision Date: 2006-04-19
Citations: 108 Ohio St. 3d 528
Docket Number: Nos. 2004-1188 and 2004-1688
Parties: The State of Ohio, Appellant, v. Cantwell, Appellee.
Judges: Moyer, C.J., Resnick, Lundberg Stratton, O’Connor, O’Donnell and Lanzinger, JJ., concur.
Reporter: Ohio State Reports, Third Service
Volume: 108
Pages: 528–529

Head Matter:
The State of Ohio, Appellant, v. Cantwell, Appellee.
[Cite as State v. Cantwell, 108 Ohio St.3d 528, 2006-Ohio-1706.]
(Nos. 2004-1188 and 2004-1688
Submitted March 15, 2006
Decided April 19, 2006.)

Opinion:
{¶ 1} The certified question is answered in the affirmative, the judgment of the court of appeals is reversed on the authority of State v. Threatt, 108 Ohio St.3d 277, 2006-Ohio-905, 843 N.E.2d 164, and the judgments of the trial court denying appellee's motions to waive court costs and to vacate the order of garnishment are reinstated.
John D. Ferrero, Stark County Prosecuting Attorney, and Kathleen 0. Tatar-sky and Amy S. Andrews, Assistant Prosecuting Attorneys, for appellant.
J. Dean Carro, for appellee.
Moyer, C.J., Resnick, Lundberg Stratton, O'Connor, O'Donnell and Lanzinger, JJ., concur.
Pfeifer, J., dissents for the reasons stated in his separate opinion in State v. White, 103 Ohio St.3d 580, 2004-Ohio-5989, 817 N.E.2d 393.