Nathaniel Lamont Wiggins v. State, 622 S.W.3d 556

Nathaniel Wiggins was indicted for aggravated robbery with a deadly weapon in Harris County (338th District Court) and pleaded not guilty; jury convicted and sentenced to 20 years.
Judge Ramona Franklin (the elected 338th Court judge) signed pretrial orders but did not preside at trial; on the first day of trial the regional presiding judge (Susan Brown) assigned Judge Denise Collins to hear the case under Tex. Gov’t Code § 74.056(a).
Wiggins did not object at trial to Judge Collins’s assignment or qualifications.
The judgment assessed court costs (reflected as $290 in court costs and $370 reimbursement fees) and was signed by Judge Collins.
On appeal Wiggins raised two issues: (1) an as-applied constitutional challenge to section 74.056(a) under Tex. Const. art. V, § 7, and (2) that the trial court assessed statutorily unauthorized/consequentially excessive consolidated court costs and failed to make an ability-to-pay inquiry.

Issue	Wiggins' Argument	State's Argument	Held
Validity of Gov’t Code § 74.056(a) assignment (as-applied)	§ 74.056(a) may be applied only if the elected judge is absent, disabled, or disqualified per Tex. Const. art. V, § 7; no record showing Judge Franklin was absent/disabled/disqualified, so assignment unconstitutional	Legislature may authorize visiting-judge assignments beyond the narrow situations listed in art. V, § 7; § 74.056(a) is facially valid and may be applied here	Rejected Wiggins’ as-applied challenge; § 74.056(a) constitutional as applied and assignment valid
Assessment of consolidated court costs & ability-to-pay inquiry	Trial court assessed $185 consolidated costs effective 2020 statute but offense occurred in 2017 so only $133 authorized; also asserts no ability-to-pay inquiry as required	State concedes the pre-2020 rate ($133) applies; trial-judgment recitals indicate an ability-to-pay inquiry was conducted, creating a presumption of regularity	Modified judgment to reduce consolidated costs from $185 to $133 (decrease of $52); affirmed remainder of judgment; ability-to-pay claim overruled based on judgment recitals

Ex parte Lo, 424 S.W.3d 10 (Tex. Crim. App. 2013) (statute constitutionality reviewed de novo)
State ex rel. Lykos v. Fine, 330 S.W.3d 904 (Tex. Crim. App. 2011) (describing "as-applied" challenge framework)
Dean v. Dean, 214 S.W. 505 (Tex. App.—Austin 1919) (upholding legislative power to provide for special judges beyond constitution’s listed contingencies)
Breazeale v. State, 683 S.W.2d 446 (Tex. Crim. App. 1985) (judgment recitals create presumption of regularity)
Ex parte Wilson, 716 S.W.2d 953 (Tex. Crim. App. 1986) (burden on defendant to rebut presumption of regularity)
Oakley v. State, 830 S.W.2d 107 (Tex. Crim. App. 1992) (interpret constitution by plain text)