Jahye Akhil v. the State of Texas

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: July 17, 2025
• Docket: 02-24-00311-CR
• Status: Published

Opinion

In the Court of Appeals Second Appellate District of Texas at Fort Worth ___________________________

No. 02-24-00311-CR ___________________________

JAHYE AKHIL, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS

On Appeal from the 485th District Court Tarrant County, Texas Trial Court No. 1754450

Before Sudderth, C.J.; Kerr and Birdwell, JJ. Memorandum Opinion by Justice Kerr MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant Jahye Akhil pleaded guilty to sexual assault of a child, a second-

degree felony. See Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 22.011(a), (f); see also id. § 12.33 (stating

second-degree felony-punishment range is 2 to 20 years’ confinement and up to a

$10,000 fine). At the conclusion of Akhil’s punishment hearing, the trial court

pronounced a thirteen-year sentence with Akhil’s “fees and court costs . . . to be

satisfied with the time [he had] served.” See generally Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art.

43.09 (addressing credit for time served). However, in its written judgment, the trial

court added a $100 fine and $25 in reimbursement fees but also ordered court costs,

the $100 fine, and the $25 reimbursement fees “to run concurrent with sentence.”

The bill of costs shows that Akhil owes $0 for the court costs but $25 for

reimbursement.

Akhil’s court-appointed appellate counsel has filed a motion to withdraw as

counsel and a supporting brief in which he avers that, in his professional opinion, this

appeal is frivolous. Counsel’s brief professionally evaluates the appellate record and

demonstrates why no arguable grounds for relief exist; the brief and withdrawal

motion meet the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744–45, 87 S. Ct.

1396, 1400 (1967). See Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 509–10 (Tex. Crim. App.

1991). Counsel also complied with the requirements of Kelly v. State, 436 S.W.3d 313,

319–20 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014).

2 Akhil did not seek access to the appellate record and did not file a pro se

response. Likewise, the State did not file a response, but in a letter to this court, it

agreed with appointed counsel’s determination that there were no meritorious

grounds upon which to advance an appeal.

After an appellant’s court-appointed counsel files a motion to withdraw on the

ground that an appeal is frivolous and fulfills Anders’s requirements, we must

independently examine the record for any arguable ground that may be raised on the

appellant’s behalf. See Stafford, 813 S.W.2d at 511. Only then may we grant counsel’s

motion to withdraw. See Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 82–83, 109 S. Ct. 346, 351 (1988).

We have carefully reviewed counsel’s brief and the appellate record. We agree

with counsel that, but for the following minor errors in the judgment and bill of costs,

the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit; we find nothing in the appellate

record that otherwise arguably might support the appeal. See Bledsoe v. State, 178

S.W.3d 824, 827–28 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005); see also Meza v. State, 206 S.W.3d 684, 685

n.6 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006).

The trial court did not orally pronounce a fine during sentencing, but the

written judgment lists a $100 fine, and the trial court check-marked a “Child Abuse

Prevention Fine” of $100. “A fine is not a court cost or fee; it is part of the

punishment.” Anastassov v. State, 664 S.W.3d 815, 823 (Tex. Crim. App. 2022). Thus,

barring a jury-verdict exception not applicable here, see Ette v. State, 559 S.W.3d 511,

513 (Tex. Crim. App. 2018), a fine must be orally pronounced in the defendant’s

3 presence. Armstrong v. State, 340 S.W.3d 759, 767 (Tex. Crim. App. 2011). We correct

the judgment by deleting the fine that was not orally pronounced during sentencing;

correct the special finding that the fine, fees, and court costs would “run concurrent

with the sentence” to reflect the oral pronouncement that the fees and court costs are

to be credited for time served; and delete the $25 listed in the bill of costs under

“Reimbursement Fee Breakdown” to reflect that credit. See Bray v. State, 179 S.W.3d

725, 730 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2005, no pet.) (en banc); see also Tex. Code Crim.

Proc. Ann. art. 43.09.

Having made these corrections to the judgment and bill of costs, we grant

counsel’s motion to withdraw and affirm the trial court’s judgment as modified.

/s/ Elizabeth Kerr Elizabeth Kerr Justice

Do Not Publish Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b)

Delivered: July 17, 2025