Wiley, Sam Jr., 410 S.W.3d 313

Background

Wiley was found indigent, appointed counsel, and pled guilty to hindering apprehension; the court suspended an 8-year sentence and placed him on 8 years’ community supervision.
The written judgment listed $898 in court costs and incorporated a bill of costs that included $400 for appointed counsel at the plea and later another $400 for counsel at revocation, totaling $800 after revocation.
Wiley signed a written waiver of appeal at sentencing and did not appeal the original judgment imposing community supervision and costs.
The State later revoked Wiley’s supervision; the trial court sentenced him to 8 years’ confinement and reiterated the obligation to pay the court costs; Wiley then appealed the revocation and challenged the sufficiency of evidence supporting the assessed attorney fees.
The court of appeals held Wiley procedurally defaulted by failing to object at sentencing; the State conceded the record lacked a finding of changed financial resources necessary to impose fees for the initial plea counsel.
The Court of Criminal Appeals granted review and affirmed, but on a different ground: Wiley forfeited the sufficiency claim by not raising it in a direct appeal from the original judgment imposing community supervision.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the sufficiency challenge to assessed appointed-attorney fees is preserved when raised for first time on appeal from revocation	Wiley: challenge ripe because revocation order explicitly reiterated the fee and he could not have objected earlier to a renewed obligation	State/Waco Ct. of Appeals: claim forfeited because Wiley failed to object at trial when fees were imposed as a probation condition	Court: Forfeited — not by failure to object at trial under Speth, but by failing to raise the claim in a direct appeal from the original judgment imposing supervision (Manuel)
Whether Speth requires trial objection to preserve attack on fees when fees are in judgment and also a condition of supervision	Wiley: Speth should not bar appellate review because the revocation order renewed the obligation	State: Speth requires complaining at trial to contested probation conditions	Court: Speth does not control — Mayer governs when fees are imposed as part of the judgment; a sufficiency claim may be raised on appeal without trial objection, but must be raised in the direct appeal from the original judgment
Whether Mayer allows raising sufficiency of attorney-fee assessment without trial objection after a negotiated plea	Wiley: Mayer supports appellate review	State: Mayer involved a jury trial and may be distinguishable	Court: Mayer applies to judgment obligations (fees as court costs), but procedural default doctrine bars raising it for first time after revocation if not appealed earlier
Whether the record supported imposition of appointed-attorney fees	Wiley: record insufficient — no finding of changed financial resources after indigence determination	State: fees were imposed in judgment and condition; appellate relief procedural posture disputed	Court: Merits conceded as to initial $400 (insufficient evidence), but claim forfeited by failure to appeal the original judgment; therefore no relief on revocation appeal

Key Cases Cited

Mayer v. State, 309 S.W.3d 552 (Tex. Crim. App. 2010) (sufficiency challenge to assessed attorney fees in judgment may be raised on appeal without trial objection)
Armstrong v. State, 340 S.W.3d 759 (Tex. Crim. App. 2011) (held assessment-of-fees question is a criminal-law matter subject to appeal; discussed interplay with preservation doctrines)
Manuel v. State, 994 S.W.2d 658 (Tex. Crim. App. 1999) (issues that could have been raised on direct appeal from imposition of community supervision cannot be raised for first time on appeal after revocation)
Speth v. State, 6 S.W.3d 530 (Tex. Crim. App. 1999) (defendant who accepts probation conditions as part of plea must complain at trial to objections to those conditions)