Court of Appeals of Texas, Twelfth District, Tyler
from the 7th District Court of Smith County, Texas (Tr.Ct.No.
consisted of Worthen, C.J., Hoyle, J., and Neeley, J.
Flournoy appeals his conviction for possession of a
controlled substance. Appellant's counsel filed a brief
in compliance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S.
738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), and Gainous v.
State, 436 S.W.2d 137 (Tex. Crim. App. 1969). We modify
and affirm as modified.
was charged by indictment with possession of one gram or more
but less than four grams of cocaine enhanced by a prior
felony conviction. He pleaded "guilty," and the
trial court assessed his punishment at imprisonment for eight
years. This appeal followed.
Pursuant to Anders v. California Appellant's counsel
filed a brief in compliance with Anders v.
California and Gainous v. State.
Appellant's counsel relates that he reviewed the record
and found no reversible error or jurisdictional defect. In
compliance with High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807, 812
(Tex. Crim. App. [Panel Op.] 1978), counsel's brief
contains a professional evaluation of the record
demonstrating why there are no arguable grounds to be
considered counsel's brief and conducted our own
independent review of the record. Id. at 811. We
found no reversible error.
reviewing the record, we found an error in the amount of
court costs in the judgment. We have the authority to reform
a judgment in an Anders appeal and to affirm the
judgment as reformed. See Tex. R. App. P. 43.2(b);
Bray v. State, 179 S.W.3d 725, 726 (Tex. App.-Fort
Worth 2005, no pet.) (en banc).
imposition of court costs upon a criminal defendant is a
"nonpunitive recoupment of the costs of judicial
resources expended in connection with the trial of the
case." Johnson v. State, 423 S.W.3d 385, 390
(Tex. Crim. App. 2014). In reviewing the assessment of court
costs, we review the record to determine whether there is a
basis for the costs. Id.
case, the final judgment imposes $328.00 in court costs. A
bill of costs lists the name and amount of each cost and
includes a $34.00 DNA testing fee. The code of criminal
procedure provides that a person must pay a court cost of
$34.00 for DNA testing when he is placed on community
supervision. Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 102.020(a)(3)
(West 2018). Here, because Appellant was not placed on
community supervision, we find no basis in the record for the
$34.00 DNA testing fee.
the authority to correct a trial court's judgment to make
the record speak the truth when we have the necessary data
and information. Asberry v. State, 813 S.W.2d 526,
529 (Tex. App.-Dallas 1991, pet. ref'd). Because we have
the necessary data and information to correct the amount of
court costs in this case, we conclude that the ...