Unreported / Non-Citable
Background
Andrea Michelle Collard was convicted by jury of Class B misdemeanor criminal trespass under Texas Penal Code § 30.05. The trial court in Tarrant County assessed punishment at ninety days’ confinement but suspended the sentence and placed Collard on eighteen months’ community supervision. Collard appealed to the Second Court of Appeals.
Collard’s court-appointed appellate counsel filed a motion to withdraw and an Anders v. California brief, representing that no reversible, non-frivolous issues existed for appeal. Counsel complied with Anders requirements by providing a professional evaluation of the record and demonstrating why no arguable grounds for relief were available. The State agreed with counsel that no reversible issues existed. Collard did not file a pro se response or request the appellate record.
The Court’s Holding
The appellate court independently examined the record as required by Anders procedure. The court determined that the appeal was wholly frivolous and without merit, with one exception: it found $7 in “Reimbursement Fees” that had been assessed against Collard without any statutory basis.
The court held that only statutorily authorized costs may be assessed against a criminal defendant under Texas Code of Criminal Procedure Chapter 102. Because the trial court’s judgment contained no bill of costs and the reimbursement fee lacked statutory authorization, the court deleted the $7 fee from the judgment. The court then granted counsel’s motion to withdraw and affirmed the conviction as modified, eliminating only the unauthorized fee.
Key Takeaways
- Trial courts may not assess costs or fees against defendants without express statutory authorization under Texas law.
- Appellate courts must independently review the record even when counsel concludes an appeal is frivolous, as required by Anders v. California.
- Minor non-reversible errors in judgment may be corrected on appeal even when the underlying conviction is affirmed.
- The court distinguished between the validity of the underlying conviction and collateral issues such as unauthorized fee assessments.
Why It Matters
This decision reinforces that Texas courts are bound by statutory limits on assessing costs and reimbursement fees against defendants. Trial courts cannot impose charges simply because a defendant has been convicted—each cost must be expressly authorized by statute. The absence of a bill of costs in the record compounds the error, leaving no basis to support such assessments.
For practitioners, the decision illustrates the importance of appellate counsel’s Anders obligation to ensure independent review occurs, and demonstrates that courts will correct even minor monetary errors that lack statutory grounding, regardless of whether the underlying conviction stands on solid ground.