William Tyrone Washington v. State

Court of Appeals of Texas

William Tyrone Washington v. State

DecidedFebruary 21, 2013

Docket14-12-00466-CR

StatusPublished

This text of William Tyrone Washington v. State (William Tyrone Washington 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.

Bluebook

William Tyrone Washington v. State, (Tex. Ct. App. 2013).

Pincite

Opinion

Affirmed as Modified and Memorandum Opinion filed February 21, 2013.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14-12-00466-CR

WILLIAM TYRONE WASHINGTON, Appellant

V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 262nd District Court Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 1345408

MEMORANDUM OPINION This is an appeal about court costs. Appellant William Tyrone Washington pleaded not guilty to aggravated sexual assault of a child. A jury found appellant guilty and assessed punishment at confinement for fifty-five years in prison. In a single issue on appeal, appellant contends that there is insufficient evidence in the record to support the court costs in the amount of $719.00 assessed against him in the judgment. We reform the trial court’s judgment to delete the specific amount of costs assessed and affirm the judgment as modified. In its judgment, the trial court ordered appellant to pay $719.00 in court costs. The clerk’s record filed with this court does not contain a bill of costs or any other evidence showing the amount of court costs.

In Johnson v. State, ___ S.W.3d ___, No. 14-11-00693-CR; 2012 WL 4878803, at *3 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] Oct. 16, 2012, no pet. h.), this court held that when the record does not support the assessment of a certain dollar amount in costs, the trial court errs in entering a specific dollar amount in its judgment.

The trial court did not err in ordering appellant to pay costs, as such is mandated by the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure. See Tex. Code Crim. Proc. art. 42.16. The court erred, however, in entering a specific dollar amount of costs in the judgment without any support in the record. See Johnson, at *3.

Because there is no evidence in the record to support the trial court’s assessment of a specific dollar amount as court costs, we reform the trial court’s judgment to delete the specific amount of costs assessed. See id. at *5. As modified, we affirm the judgment.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Christopher, Jamison, and McCally. Do Not Publish — Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Affirmed as Modified and Memorandum Opinion filed February 21, 2013.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14-12-00466-CR

WILLIAM TYRONE WASHINGTON, Appellant

V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 262nd District Court Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 1345408

MEMORANDUM OPINION This is an appeal about court costs. Appellant William Tyrone Washington pleaded not guilty to aggravated sexual assault of a child. A jury found appellant guilty and assessed punishment at confinement for fifty-five years in prison. In a single issue on appeal, appellant contends that there is insufficient evidence in the record to support the court costs in the amount of $719.00 assessed against him in the judgment. We reform the trial court’s judgment to delete the specific amount of costs assessed and affirm the judgment as modified. In its judgment, the trial court ordered appellant to pay $719.00 in court costs. The clerk’s record filed with this court does not contain a bill of costs or any other evidence showing the amount of court costs.

In Johnson v. State, ___ S.W.3d ___, No. 14-11-00693-CR; 2012 WL 4878803, at *3 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] Oct. 16, 2012, no pet. h.), this court held that when the record does not support the assessment of a certain dollar amount in costs, the trial court errs in entering a specific dollar amount in its judgment.

The trial court did not err in ordering appellant to pay costs, as such is mandated by the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure. See Tex. Code Crim. Proc. art. 42.16. The court erred, however, in entering a specific dollar amount of costs in the judgment without any support in the record. See Johnson, at *3.

Because there is no evidence in the record to support the trial court’s assessment of a specific dollar amount as court costs, we reform the trial court’s judgment to delete the specific amount of costs assessed. See id. at *5. As modified, we affirm the judgment.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Christopher, Jamison, and McCally. Do Not Publish — Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

William Tyrone Washington v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/william-tyrone-washington-v-state-texapp-2013.

Opinion

V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack