Nakeldrick Curtis Erskine v. State
12-16-00186-CR
| Tex. App. | Jul 31, 2017Background
- Nakeldrick Curtis Erskine pleaded guilty to delivery of a controlled substance (case no. 007-1422-15) and unlawful possession of a firearm by a felon (case no. 007-1423-15); bench trial was on punishment.
- Sentences: 40 years imprisonment plus $180 restitution for the drug offense; 20 years imprisonment for the firearm offense.
- Bills of costs assessed in each case included $50 in warrant/capias fees; the firearm case also assessed a $34 DNA testing fee.
- Erskine challenged the court costs on appeal, arguing warrant fees were unsupported (arrest was "on sight") and the DNA fee was improper because it applies only to persons placed on community supervision.
- The State conceded the DNA fee lacked statutory support; the State argued capias execution supported the $50 fee despite the bills labeling it a "warrant fee."
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Validity of $50 warrant/capias fee in each case | Fees unsupported because arrest was "on sight," so no warrant issued | A capias was executed in each case; statute authorizes $50 for executed warrants/capias | Overruled—$50 fee authorized because a capias was executed despite label "warrant fee" |
| Validity of $34 DNA testing fee in firearm case | No basis; statute authorizes DNA fee only when placed on community supervision and Erskine was not | State conceded the fee was unsupported | Sustained—$34 fee removed and judgment modified |
Key Cases Cited
- Johnson v. State, 423 S.W.3d 385 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014) (bills of costs need not mirror statutory labels; court may look to record to determine statutory support for assessed costs)