From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In re C.G.

Court of Appeals of Texas, Second District, Fort Worth
Jan 25, 2024
No. 02-23-00174-CV (Tex. App. Jan. 25, 2024)

Opinion

02-23-00174-CV 02-23-00175-CV

01-25-2024

In the Matter of C.G.


On Appeal from the 323rd District Court Tarrant County, Texas Trial Court Nos. 323-120438-22, 323-120697-23

Before Birdwell, Bassel, and Womack, JJ.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

WADE BIRDWELL JUSTICE

Sixteen-year-old Appellant C.G. judicially confessed to having committed evading arrest or detention, and the trial court found him delinquent and placed him on probation. Four days later, C.G. committed terroristic threat. After C.G. judicially confessed to this second offense, the trial court again found him delinquent, placed him on probation concurrent with the prior offense, and modified his probation to order C.G.'s removal from his home and placement in an out-of-state residential treatment facility. C.G. appeals the trial court's judgments.

C.G.'s court-appointed appellate counsel has filed a motion to withdraw and a brief in which he asserts that after thoroughly examining the record, he has found "no errors warranting reversal that can be legitimately supported by the record." Counsel's brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744-45, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 1400 (1967). See In re D.A.S., 973 S.W.2d 296, 299 (Tex. 1998) (orig. proceeding) (applying Anders procedure to juvenile proceedings).

Counsel provided a copy of the brief to C.G., informed C.G. of his right to review the record and to file a pro se response to the Anders brief, and informed him of his right to file a petition for review with the Texas Supreme Court if we affirm the trial court's judgment. C.G. did not file a pro se response. The State also declined to respond.

Because C.G.'s counsel filed an Anders brief, we must independently examine the record to decide whether counsel correctly concluded that the appeal is frivolous. See Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 511 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). After carefully reviewing the record and counsel's brief, with the minor exception of court costs addressed below, we find nothing in the record that might arguably support the appeal; thus, we agree with counsel that the appeal is frivolous. See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826-27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005).

We do, however, find error in the court costs assessed against C.G. Juvenile cases are governed by the Rules of Civil Procedure, see Tex. Fam. Code Ann. § 51.17(a), under which the definition of "costs" includes fees charged by the clerk for preparation of the appellate record, Tex.R.Civ.P. 145(a). "For a party who files an affidavit of inability to pay costs, there are no costs to bill." Campbell v. Wilder, 487 S.W.3d 146, 151 (Tex. 2016) (explaining that under Rule 145, the affidavit is in lieu of paying or giving security for costs, and that an uncontested affidavit of inability to pay is conclusive as a matter of law).

The record reflects that in December 2022, after his first offense, C.G. (via his grandmother) filed an affidavit of indigence in the trial court and received appointed counsel, and the same affidavit was used to support appointment of counsel for his second offense. There is no showing that C.G. ever ceased to be indigent or that his indigency was ever contested. Nonetheless, the trial court clerk assessed costs of $288 for clerk's record fees, district clerk's fees, and certification-and-seal fees ($169 in appellate cause number 02-23-00174-CV for the clerk's record and sealed supplemental clerk's record, and $119 in appellate cause number 02-23-00175-CV for the clerk's record and sealed supplemental clerk's record). Because of C.G.'s indigence, we remove these charges from the bill of costs in each case, see id., and we affirm the trial court's judgments and grant counsel's motion to withdraw.

If C.G. wishes to seek further review of this case, he must either file a pro se petition for review in the Texas Supreme Court or retain an attorney to file a petition for review in the Texas Supreme Court. See In re D.J., No. 02-20-00386-CV, 2021 WL 2586610, at *1 (Tex. App.-Fort Worth June 24, 2021, no pet.) (mem. op.); see also Tex. R. App. P. 53.2 (listing required contents of petition for review), 53.7(a) (providing time and place of filing a petition for review).


Summaries of

In re C.G.

Court of Appeals of Texas, Second District, Fort Worth
Jan 25, 2024
No. 02-23-00174-CV (Tex. App. Jan. 25, 2024)
Case details for

In re C.G.

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of C.G.

Court:Court of Appeals of Texas, Second District, Fort Worth

Date published: Jan 25, 2024

Citations

No. 02-23-00174-CV (Tex. App. Jan. 25, 2024)