Jesse Nolan Fields, Jr. v. the State of Texas

IN THE
TENTH COURT OF APPEALS
No. 10-21-00275-CR
JESSE NOLAN FIELDS, JR.,
Appellant
v.
THE STATE OF TEXAS,
Appellee
From the 82nd District Court
Falls County, Texas
Trial Court No. 10468
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Jesse Nolan Fields, Jr., appeals from the adjudication of his guilt for family violence
assault by impeding breath or circulation, which previously had been deferred, and from
his resulting ten-year sentence. We affirm the trial court’s judgment as modified.
Fields’s appointed counsel filed a motion to withdraw and an Anders brief in
support of the motion asserting that he has diligently reviewed the appellate record and
that, in his opinion, the appeal is frivolous. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct.
1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). Counsel’s brief evidences a professional evaluation of the
record for error and compliance with the other duties of appointed counsel. We conclude
that counsel has performed the duties required of appointed counsel. See id. at 744, 87
S.Ct. at 1400; High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807, 812–13 (Tex. Crim. App. [Panel Op.] 1978); see
also Kelly v. State, 436 S.W.3d 313, 319–20 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014); In re Schulman, 252
S.W.3d 403, 407–09 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008).
In reviewing an Anders appeal, we must, “after a full examination of all the
proceedings, . . . decide whether the case is wholly frivolous.” Anders, 386 U.S. at 744, 87
S.Ct. at 1400; see Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 80, 109 S.Ct. 346, 349–50, 102 L.Ed.2d 300(1988); accord Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 509–11 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). An appeal
is “wholly frivolous” or “without merit” when it “lacks any basis in law or fact.” McCoy
v. Court of Appeals, 486 U.S. 429, 438 n.10, 108 S.Ct. 1895, 1902 n.10, 100 L.Ed.2d 440 (1988).
We have carefully reviewed the record and counsel’s brief. While we conclude
that there is no error that would require reversal of Fields’s conviction or sentence, we
have determined that the trial court’s judgment adjudicating Fields’s guilt includes what
we identify as a Category 3 nonreversible error—an “unassigned, nonreversible error that
has been preserved at trial or that is not subject to procedural default.” See Cummins v.
State, 646 S.W.3d 605, 617 (Tex. App.—Waco 2022, pet. ref’d).
The trial court’s judgment adjudicating Fields’s guilt includes the assessment of
court costs in the amount of $1,779, and the certified bill of cost indicates that that amount
includes a $1,500 fine. A fine, which constitutes punishment and is part of a defendant’s
sentence, should not be included in the bill of costs. See Brumfield v. State, 641 S.W.3d 568,
583 (Tex. App.—Tyler 2022, pet. ref’d); Williams v. State, 495 S.W.3d 583, 591 (Tex. App.—
Fields v. State Page 2
Houston [1st Dist.] 2016), pet. dism’d, improvidently granted, No. PD-0947-16, 2017 WL
1493488 (Tex. Crim. App. Apr. 26, 2017) (per curiam) (not designated for publication).
Furthermore, our review of the record shows that the trial court did not impose a fine
when Fields’s guilt was adjudicated. The trial court did not include a fine in its oral
pronouncement of sentence at Fields’s revocation hearing. See Taylor v. State, 131 S.W.3d
497, 502 (Tex. Crim. App. 2004). And although the trial court’s order deferring
adjudication of Fields’s guilt reflects that Fields was assessed a $1,500 fine at that time,
the trial court’s judgment adjudicating Fields’s guilt indicates that no fine was assessed.
In these instances where we have identified a Category 3 nonreversible error, we
have the authority to fix the error. Cummins, 646 S.W.3d at 617. Accordingly, we modify
the trial court’s judgment adjudicating Fields’s guilt to reflect court costs assessed in the
amount of only $279.00. 1
Except for this modification, we agree with counsel that this appeal is wholly
frivolous and without merit. Our independent review of the entire record in this appeal
reveals nothing further that might arguably support the appeal. See Bledsoe v. State, 178
S.W.3d 824, 826–28 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). Accordingly, we affirm the trial court’s
judgment as modified.
Counsel’s motion to withdraw from representation of Fields is granted.
1We also modify the certified bill of cost by striking the assessed fine. See, e.g., Bryant v. State, 642 S.W.3d
847, 849–50 (Tex. App.—Waco 2021, no pet.); see also TEX. R. APP. P. 43.6.
Fields v. State Page 3
MATT JOHNSON
Justice
Before Chief Justice Gray,
Justice Johnson, and
Justice Smith
Affirmed as modified
Opinion delivered and filed November 22, 2022
Do not publish
[CR25]
Fields v. State Page 4