IN THE
TENTH COURT OF APPEALS
No. 10-12-00204-CR
BRIAN COOK,
Appellant
v.
THE STATE OF TEXAS,
Appellee
From the 52nd District Court
Coryell County, Texas
Trial Court No. FISC-11-20887
MEMORANDUM OPINION
In two issues, appellant, Brian Thomas Cook, challenges the amount of court
costs assessed by the trial court. We affirm.
I. BACKGROUND
On August 30, 2011, appellant was charged by indictment with aggravated
sexual assault of a child, a first-degree felony. See TEX. PENAL CODE ANN. § 22.021 (West
Supp. 2012). Appellant subsequently entered an open plea of guilty to the charged
offense. The trial court accepted appellant’s plea and sentenced him to twelve years’
incarceration in the Institutional Division of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice
with no fine. In addition, the trial court ordered that appellant pay $599.00 in court
costs. An order to withdraw funds from appellant’s inmate account was incorporated
in the judgment. This appeal followed.
II. ANALYSIS
In his brief, appellant argues that the evidence is insufficient to support the
amount of court costs assessed by the trial court in this case because there was no bill of
costs prepared, though required by article 103.001 of the Texas Code of Criminal
Procedure. See TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 103.001 (West 2006).
Though not available to counsel at the time appellant’s brief was filed, the Texas
Court of Criminal Appeals has recently held that a bill of costs need not be included in
the record to support the assessment of mandatory or statutorily-authorized court costs.
Johnson v. State, No. PD-0193-13, ___ S.W.3d ___, 2014 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 240, at
**25-26 (Tex. Crim. App. Feb. 26, 2014); see Cardenas v. State, No. PD-0733-13, ___ S.W.3d
___, 2014 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 236, at *3 (Tex. Crim. App. Feb. 26, 2014). Thus, if the
court costs in this case are mandatory or authorized by statute, then a bill of costs was
not required to be included in the record.
In the instant case, a bill of costs was not originally included in the record.
However, after abating and remanding this proceeding, the trial-court clerk created a
supplemental clerk’s record containing an itemized bill of costs documenting the costs
incurred from August 30, 2011 to May 24, 2013. See Johnson, 2014 Tex. Crim. App.
LEXIS 240, at **15-16 (concluding that a bill of costs can be prepared and added to the
Cook v. State Page 2
record via a supplemental clerk’s record); see also Jones v. State, No. 06-12-00107-CR, 2013
Tex. App. LEXIS 2832, at *16 (Tex. App.—Texarkana Mar. 19, 2013, no pet.) (mem. op.,
not designated for publication). As shown in the table below, the complained-of costs
are mandated by statute:
Fee Assessed Amount Statutory Authority
Child Abuse Prevention $100 TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC.
Fund/Off. After 9/01/05 ANN. art. 102.0186(a)(1)
(West Supp. 2013).
Consolidated Court Cost $133 TEX. LOC. GOV’T CODE
ANN. § 133.102(a)(1)
(West Supp. 2013).
District Clerk Filing Fee $40 TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC.
ANN. art. 102.005(a)
(West 2006).
Records Management & $25 TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC.
Preservation Fee ANN. art. 102.005(f)
(West 2006).
Courthouse Security Fee $5 TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC.
ANN. art. 102.017(a)
(West Supp. 2013).
Arrest Fee $5 TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC.
ANN. art. 102.011(a)(1)
(West Supp. 2013).
Indigent Legal Services $2 TEX. LOC. GOV’T CODE
ANN. § 133.107(a) (West
Supp. 2013).
Judicial Support Fee: Criminal $4 TEX. LOC. GOV’T CODE
ANN. § 133.105(a) (West
2008).
Jury Reimbursement $6 TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC.
ANN. art. 102.0045(a)
(West Supp. 2013).
Time Payment Fee $25 TEX. LOC. GOV’T CODE
ANN. § 133.103(a) (West
Supp. 2013).
District Technology Fee $4 TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC.
ANN. art. 102.0169(a)
(West Supp. 2013).
DNA Fee on Sex-Related After $250 TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC.
Cook v. State Page 3
9/1/2001 ANN. art. 102.020(a)(1)
(West Supp. 2013).
Therefore, because the complained-of costs contained in the bill of costs are
mandated by statute, we reject appellant’s complaints about the absence of a bill of costs
in the record. See Johnson, 2014 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 240, at **25-26; Cardenas, 2014
Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 236, at *3; Mayer v. State, 309 S.W.3d 552, 557 (Tex. Crim. App.
2010) (stating that we review the sufficiency of the evidence to support the award of
costs by viewing all record evidence in the light most favorable to the award); see also
Thomas v. State, No. 01-12-00487-CR, ___ S.W.3d ___, 2013 Tex. App. LEXIS 2989, at **9-
13 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] Mar. 21, 2013, no pet.) (concluding that sufficient
evidence supports the judgment awarding costs that are mandated by statute). We do
note, however, that the bill of costs appears to reverse the jury-reimbursement and
judicial-support fees. Article 102.0045 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure states
that a person convicted of an offense shall pay, as court costs, $4 for jury
reimbursement. TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 102.0045. On the other hand, section
133.105(a) of the Texas Local Government Code provides that a person convicted of an
offense shall pay, as court costs, $6 for “court-related purposes for the support of the
judiciary.” TEX. LOC. GOV’T CODE ANN. § 133.105(a). Though the fee assessments for
these line items are incorrect, we recognize that the net result is the same. As such, any
error associated with the bill of costs is harmless. Therefore, based on the foregoing, we
overrule both of appellant’s issues on appeal.
III. CONCLUSION
Cook v. State Page 4
We affirm the judgment of the trial court.
AL SCOGGINS
Justice
Before Chief Justice Gray,
Justice Davis, and
Justice Scoggins
Affirmed
Opinion delivered and filed March 13, 2014
Do not publish
[CR25]
Cook v. State Page 5