Valerie Salyards Gilmore v. State
12-15-00049-CR
| Tex. App. | Jun 8, 2015Background
- Appellant Valerie Salyards Gilmore pleaded guilty to possession of methamphetamine; trial court entered judgment and a withdrawal order assessing $344.00 in court costs on Feb 20, 2015.
- After appeal was filed, the Smith County District Clerk filed a certified bill of costs (May 18, 2015) listing $369.00 in costs, $25 more than the judgment because a $25 time-payment fee was later assessed.
- Appellant argued the trial court erred by ordering withdrawal from her inmate trust account without a supporting bill of costs in the record at the time of the judgment.
- The State contends the record was properly supplemented with the bill of costs via a supplemental clerk’s record and therefore the higher total controls; the State asks the appellate court to modify the judgment to reflect $369.00 and affirm as modified.
- Legal question centers on whether a post-judgment certified bill of costs added to the appellate record can support the amount of court costs and allow reformation of the judgment.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether trial court erred in ordering withdrawal of funds without a bill of costs in the record | Gilmore: withdrawal order lacked a supporting bill of costs at time judgment entered | State: certified bill of costs was later added by supplemental clerk’s record; bill controls and supports withdrawal | Court: supplemental certified bill of costs properly added; judgment should be modified to reflect $369.00 |
| Whether a bill of costs must be orally pronounced or in the judgment to be effective | Gilmore: implies absent bill in record means costs unsupported | State: statute and precedent allow certified bill of costs to establish costs without oral pronouncement | Court: certified bill of costs need not be orally pronounced or incorporated to be effective |
| Whether appellate court may reform judgment on appeal to reflect correct costs | Gilmore: contest to assessed amount | State: reformation appropriate when record contains necessary data (bill of costs) | Court: reformation authorized; modify judgment to match bill of costs |
| Whether assessment of additional time-payment fee after judgment is valid | Gilmore: disputes post-judgment fee inclusion | State: time-payment fee properly assessed when costs unpaid after 30 days under statute | Court: fee valid; included in certified bill and judgment reformed to include it |
Key Cases Cited
- Armstrong v. State, 340 S.W.3d 759 (Tex. Crim. App.) (certified bill of costs need not be orally pronounced or incorporated in judgment)
- Johnson v. State, 423 S.W.3d 385 (Tex. Crim. App.) (bill of costs can be added to appellate record via supplemental clerk’s record; bills need not be proven at trial)
- Ballinger v. State, 405 S.W.3d 346 (Tex. App.—Tyler) (supplementing record with bill of costs is appropriate and does not violate due process)
- Allen v. State, 426 S.W.3d 253 (Tex. App.—Texarkana) (when bill of costs differs from judgment, bill controls)
- Owen v. State, 352 S.W.3d 542 (Tex. App.—Amarillo) (clerk’s fee records constitute prima facie evidence of correctness)
- Brewer v. State, 572 S.W.2d 719 (Tex. Crim. App.) (appellate court may reform judgment when necessary data is in the record)