Affirmed as Modified and Opinion Filed January 7, 2014

In The 

## Court of Appeals **Fifth District of Texas at Dallas**
No. 05-12-01376-CR No. 05-12-01377-CR No. 05-12-01378-CR No. 05-12-01448-CR JESSE CARL CASTILLO, Appellant
V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the 363rd Dist . Ct. Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause Nos. F12-40677-W, F11-40913-W, F11-40914-W, F11-40924-W 

### MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Moseley, Bridges, and Evans Opinion by Justice Bridges A jury convicted Jesse Carl Castillo of tw o sexual performance by a child offenses, one indecency with a child by contact offense, and one indecency with a child by exposure offense.
See T EX
. P ENAL C ODE A NN
. §§ 21.11(a), (d), 43.25(b), (c) (Wes t 2011). The jury assessed punishment at twenty years’ imprisonment fo r each sexual performance by a child conviction, fifteen years’ imprisonment for the indecency with a child by contact conviction, and eight years’ imprisonment for the indecency with a child by exposure convic tion. The jury also assessed a $10,000 fine in each case. The trial co urt’s judgments also include orders that appellant pay court costs in the amounts of $614, $664, and $714. In four issues, appellant‐ 2 ‐ contends there is insufficient evidence in the reco rd to support the trial court’s orders that he pay court costs in each of the cases. We modify the trial court’s judgments and affirm as modified. Appellant contends the evidence is insufficient in each case to support the trial court’s order that he pay $614, $664, and $714 in court costs because the clerk’s records do not contain bills of costs. The State responds that the trial court was authorized to assess court costs in the amounts of $614, $664, and $714. If a criminal action is appealed, “an officer of the cour t shall certify and sign a bill of costs stating the costs that have been accrued and send the bill of costs to the court to which the action or proceeding is . . . appealed.” T EX
. C ODE C RIM
. P ROC

. A NN
. art. 103.006 (West 2006). Costs may not be collected from the person charge d with the costs until a written bill, containing the items of cost, is produced and signed by the officer who charged the cost or the officer entitled to receive pa yment for the cost. Id . art. 103.001. The clerk’s records in these cases do not cont ain the bills of costs. We, however, ordered the Dallas County District Clerk to file supplemen tal records containing certified bills of costs associated with the cases, and the clerk did so. See T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 34.5(c)(1) (rules of appellate procedure allow supplementation of clerk’s record if relevant item has been omitted). Appellant’s complaints that the evidence is insufficient to support the imposition of costs because the clerk’s records did not c ontain bills of costs are now moot. See Coronel v. State , No. 05-12-00493-CR, 2013 WL 3874446, at *4 (Tex. A pp.––Dallas July 29, 2013, pet. ref’d);
Franklin v. State , 402 S.W.3d 894, 895 (Tex. App.—Dalla s 2013, no pet.). We overrule appellant’s four issues. In response to the Court’s order requiring supp lementation of the records, appellant filed an objection that the bills of costs in the supplem ental records are not “pr oper bill[s] of costs”‐ 3 ‐ and the bills of costs were not filed in the tria l court or brought to the trial court’ s attention before costs were entered in the judgments. The Court rejected these objections and arguments
in Coronel

. See Coronel , 2013 WL 3874446, at *4–5. We likewise reject them here, and conclude the cost bills containe d in the supplemental clerk’s reco rds are sufficient to support the assessment of costs in the judgments. See id. We overrule appellant’s objection to the supplemental clerk’s records. We note that in cause nos. 05-12-01 376-CR, 05-12-01378-CR, and 05-12-01448-CR, the judgments do not contain the $10,000 fine assessed by the jury. “The judgme nt shall reflect . . . that the defendant be punished in accordan ce with the jury’s verdict. . . .” T EX
. C RIM
. P ROC

. C ODE A NN . art. 42.01, § 8 (West 2006). 1 The trial court orally read the jury’s verdict with the defendant present in the courtroom. We are aut horized to correct a judgment to accurately reflect a jury’s verdict. See T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 43.2(b); Bigley v. State , 865 S.W.2d 26, 27–28 (Tex. Crim. App. 1993); Asberry v. State , 813 S.W.2d 526, 529–30 (Tex. App.
─ Dallas 1991, pet. ref’d). We modify the judgments in those cases to include the $10,000 fine. In cause nos. 05-12-01376-CR, 05-12-01378- CR, and 05-12-01448-CR, we affirm the trial court’s judgments as modified. In cause no. 05-12-01377-CR, we affirm the trial court’s judgment.

DoNot Publish T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 47 121376F.U05

1 Unrelated amendments were made to article 42.01 after sentencing. See T EX
. C RIM
. P ROC

. C ODE A NN
. art. 42.01, § 8 (West Supp. 2013). /David L. Bridges/ DAVID L. BRIDGES JUSTICE‐ 4 ‐ 

## Court of Appeals **Fifth District of Texas at Dallas**

JUDGMENT
JESSE CARL CASTILLO, Appellant
No. 05-12-01376-CR V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee Appeal from the 363rd Judicial District Court of Dallas County, Texas (Tr.Ct.No. F12-40677-W). Opinion delivered by Justice Bridges, Justices Moseley and Evans participating.

Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, the trial court’s judgment is MODIFIED as follows: The section entitled “Fine” is modified to show “$10,000.” As modified, we AFFIRM the trial court’s judgment.

Judgment entered January 7, 2014

/David L. Bridges/ DAVID L. BRIDGES JUSTICE‐ 5 ‐ 

## Court of Appeals **Fifth District of Texas at Dallas**

JUDGMENT
JESSE CARL CASTILLO, Appellant
No. 05-12-01377-CR V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee Appeal from the 363rd Judicial District Court of Dallas County, Texas (Tr.Ct.No. F11-40913-W). Opinion delivered by Justice Bridges, Justices Moseley and Evans participating.

Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, the trial court’s judgment is AFFIRMED

.

Judgment entered January 7, 2014

/David L. Bridges/ DAVID L. BRIDGES JUSTICE

/‐ 6 ‐ 

## Court of Appeals **Fifth District of Texas at Dallas**

JUDGMENT
JESSE CARL CASTILLO, Appellant
No. 05-12-01378-CR V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee Appeal from the 363rd Judicial District Court of Dallas County, Texas (Tr.Ct.No. F11-40914-W). Opinion delivered by Justice Bridges, Justices Moseley and Evans participating.

Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, the trial court’s judgment is MODIFIED as follows: The section entitled “Fine” is modified to show “$10,000.” As modified, we AFFIRM the trial court’s judgment.

Judgment entered January 7, 2014

/David L. Bridges/ DAVID L. BRIDGES JUSTICE‐ 7 ‐ 

## Court of Appeals **Fifth District of Texas at Dallas**

JUDGMENT
JESSE CARL CASTILLO, Appellant
No. 05-12-01448-CR V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee Appeal from the 363rd Judicial District Court of Dallas County, Texas (Tr.Ct.No. F11-40924-W). Opinion delivered by Justice Bridges, Justices Moseley and Evans participating.

Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, the trial court’s judgment is MODIFIED as follows: The section entitled “Fine” is modified to show “$10,000.” As modified, we AFFIRM the trial court’s judgment.

Judgment entered January 7, 2014

/David L. Bridges/ DAVID L. BRIDGES JUSTICE