Background
Andrea Michelle Collard was convicted by jury of one Class A misdemeanor count of resisting arrest, search, or transportation under Texas Penal Code § 38.03(a). The trial court in Tarrant County Criminal Court No. 7 imposed a sentence of ninety days’ confinement but suspended imposition and placed Collard on fifteen months’ community supervision with five days’ time served credited.
Collard appealed through court-appointed counsel. Her attorney filed an Anders motion to withdraw, arguing the appeal presented no reversible, non-frivolous issues worthy of appellate review. The State agreed there were no non-frivolous grounds for reversal.
The Court’s Holding
The Second Court of Appeals affirmed Collard’s conviction but modified the judgment to correct clerical errors. The court deleted a $5 reimbursement fee that the trial court had assessed without any statutory basis under Texas Code of Criminal Procedure Chapter 102, which governs all costs in criminal cases. The court noted that officers cannot impose costs for services not expressly provided by law.
The court also deleted $270 in court costs from the judgment. Although the trial judge had verbally stated during sentencing that “any fines and court costs” were waived, the written judgment contradicted this pronouncement by listing $270 in assessed court costs. The court reformed the judgment to reflect the trial judge’s oral waiver. After correcting these minor errors, the court found no other arguable grounds for reversal and granted counsel’s motion to withdraw from the appeal.
Key Takeaways
- Appellate courts must independently examine the trial record even when appointed counsel claims an appeal is frivolous under Anders standards.
- Trial courts may assess only those costs against defendants that are expressly authorized by statute; unsupported fee assessments can be deleted on appeal.
- When a trial judge’s oral pronouncement of sentence conflicts with the written judgment, the appellate court will modify the judgment to reflect the oral pronouncement.
- Clerical and judgment errors can be corrected even in frivolous appeals where no other reversible error is found.
Why It Matters
This decision reinforces the appellate court’s gatekeeping duty in Anders cases: even when both defense counsel and the prosecution agree an appeal lacks merit, courts must independently review the record for arguable grounds of reversal before dismissing an appeal as frivolous. This protects defendants’ constitutional right to appellate review.
The case also provides practical guidance on cost assessment in criminal cases. Trial courts must ground all assessed fees and costs in specific statutory authority and ensure written judgments match what is actually pronounced in open court. Defendants should scrutinize judgment documents for discrepancies with oral pronouncements, as these errors—even small ones like unsupported fees—can be corrected on appeal.