Hearne v. State
This text of 415 S.W.3d 365 (Hearne v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinions
OPINION
Brodreck Lee Hearne pleaded guilty to the felony offense of injury to a child without an agreed recommendation as to punishment. After a bench trial on punishment, the trial court sentenced Hearne to fifteen years’ confinement. The -written judgment ordered that Hearne pay $234 in court costs. On appeal, Hearne contends that insufficient evidence supports the trial court’s assessment of court costs in the judgment absent a bill of costs. Specifically, he contends that “no documentation” supports the court costs and that “[tjhere is no certified bill of costs in the appellate record.” After receiving the parties’ briefs, this court ordered the trial court clerk to supplement the record with a bill of costs. The trial court clerk has supplemented the record with a document titled “J.I.M.S. Supplemental Costs Bill Assessment,” identifying each cost assessed. We hold that sufficient evidence supports the costs recited in the original judgment and, therefore, affirm.
Discussion
Chapter 103 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure, entitled “Collection and Recordkeeping,” governs those two aspects of costs in criminal cases. Tex.Code.Crim. Proc. Ann. arts. 103.001-.012 (West 2006 & Supp.2012); see Cardenas v. State, 403 S.W.3d 377, 382-83 (Tex.App.Houston [1st Dist.] 2013, pet. granted). The clerk of the court must keep a record of each fee or item of cost charged for a service rendered in a criminal action or proceeding. Tex.Code.Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 103.009(a)(1) (West 2006). If a criminal action or proceeding is appealed, “an officer of the court shall certify and sign a bill of costs stating the costs that have accrued” and send it to the court to which the action is appealed. Id. art. 103.006. When, as in this case, the bill of costs was not sent to this court and made part of the record, we may direct the trial court clerk to supplement the record with the bill of costs. Tex.R.App. P. 34.5(c); Cardenas, 403 S.W.3d at 382-83; Thomas v. State, No. 01-12-00487-CR, — S.W.3d —, —, 2013 WL 1163980, at *1 (Tex.App.Houston [1st Dist.] Mar. 21, 2013, no. pet.).
We review the sufficiency of the evidence supporting the award of costs in the light most favorable to the trial court’s judgment. See Mayer v. State, 309 S.W.3d 552, 557 (Tex.Crim.App.2010); Cardenas, 403 S.W.3d at 382-83; Thomas, — S.W.3d at —, 2013 WL 1163980, at [367]*367*3. The record shows the district court convicted Hearne of a felony, supporting each of the following costs listed in the cost assessment: “Clerks Fee” of $40;1 “Security Fee” of $5;2 “Consolidated Court Costs” of $133;3 “Jury Reimbursement Fee” of $4;4 “DC Records Preservation” fee of $25;5 “Support of Indigent Defense” fee of $2;6 “Support' of Judiciary Fee” of $6;7 and a “Court Technology Fund Fee” of $4.8 The cost assessment also lists a $5 fee for “Arrest W/O Warrant/Capias,” 9 a $5 fee for “Commitment,”10 and a $5 fee for “Release.”11 The sum of these costs is $234, the amount the trial court assessed as costs. Accordingly, we hold that sufficient evidence supports the judgment assessing costs of $234. See Cardenas, 403 S.W.3d at 385-89 (holding assessment of costs supported by sufficient evidence when costs consisted of statutorily mandated costs and record supported imposition of those costs); Thomas, — S.W.3d at —, 2013 WL 1163980, at *3-4 (same); Owen v. State, 352 S.W.3d 542, 547-48 (Tex.App.-Amarillo 2011, no pet.) (same).
Conclusion
We affirm the judgment of the trial court.
Justice Keyes, concurring.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
415 S.W.3d 365, 2013 WL 5006222, 2013 Tex. App. LEXIS 11627, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hearne-v-state-texapp-2013.