NO. 12-20-00281-CR

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT

TYLER, TEXAS

CHARLES KOREDE BYARS, 

APPELLANT

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS,

APPELLEE

§

§

§

APPEAL FROM THE 7TH 

JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT

SMITH COUNTY, TEXAS

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Charles Korede Byars appeals his conviction for possession of a controlled substance. In 

one issue, Appellant challenges the sufficiency of the evidence supporting the assessment of court 

costs. We affirm the trial court’s judgment.

BACKGROUND

Appellant was charged by indictment with possession of a controlled substance. Pursuant 

to a plea bargain agreement, Appellant pleaded guilty. The trial court found the evidence was 

sufficient to find Appellant guilty, but the trial court deferred further proceedings and placed 

Appellant on community supervision for three years. The State subsequently filed a motion to 

adjudicate guilt, alleging that Appellant violated the terms and conditions of his community 

supervision. Appellant pleaded “true” to the allegations in the State’s motion to adjudicate. The 

trial court found that Appellant violated the terms and conditions of his community supervision, 

adjudicated Appellant guilty, and sentenced him to four years of confinement. The trial court 

signed an order to withdraw funds from Appellant’s inmate trust account to pay court costs in the 

amount of $458.00. This appeal followed.
2

COURT COSTS

In his sole issue, Appellant argues that the trial court erred by withdrawing funds from his 

inmate trust account based on costs assessed in the trial court’s judgment because those costs are 

not supported by a statutorily required bill of costs. Since Appellant filed his brief, the appellate 

record has been supplemented with a bill of costs. See Johnson v. State, 405 S.W.3d 350, 353 

(Tex. App.—Tyler 2013, no pet.) (permitting supplementation of appellate record with bill of 

costs). Accordingly, we review Appellant’s issue as a challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence 

supporting court costs.

Standard of Review and Applicable Law

A challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence supporting court costs is reviewable on direct 

appeal in a criminal case. See Armstrong v. State, 340 S.W.3d 759, 767 (Tex. Crim. App. 2011). 

We measure sufficiency by reviewing the record in the light most favorable to the award. Mayer 

v. State, 309 S.W.3d 552, 557 (Tex. Crim. App. 2010); Cardenas v. State, 403 S.W.3d 377, 382 

(Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2013, no pet.). Requiring a convicted defendant to pay court 

costs does not alter the range of punishment, is authorized by statute, and is generally not 

conditioned on a defendant’s ability to pay. See TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 42.16 (West

2018); Armstrong, 340 S.W.3d at 767; see also Johnson, 405 S.W.3d at 354-55.

Evidence Supporting Assessment of Costs

The judgment of conviction reflects that the trial court assessed court costs of $408.00 and 

restitution of $50.00. The judgment includes a document entitled “Order to Withdraw Funds,” 

which states that Appellant incurred “[c]ourt costs, fees, fines, and restitution” in the amount of 

$458.00. The certified bill of costs itemizes the court costs imposed, the remaining balance of 

which totals $408.00. We have reviewed the items in the bill of costs, and all listed costs and fees 

are authorized by statute. See, e.g., Ireland v. State, No. 03-14-00616-CR, 2015 WL 4914982, at 

*3 n.3 (Tex. App.—Austin Aug. 12, 2015, no pet.) (mem. op., not designated for publication)

(identifying statutory sources for assessment of fees in bill of costs). Therefore, we conclude that 

the costs imposed in the trial court’s judgment are supported by sufficient evidence. Appellant’s 

sole issue is overruled.

DISPOSITION

Having overruled Appellant’s sole issue, we affirm the trial court’s judgment.
3

BRIAN HOYLE

Justice

Opinion delivered October 20, 2021.

Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Hoyle, J., and Neeley, J.

(DO NOT PUBLISH)
COURT OF APPEALS

TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT OF TEXAS

JUDGMENT

OCTOBER 20, 2021

NO. 12-20-00281-CR

CHARLES KOREDE BYARS,

Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS,

Appellee

Appeal from the 7th District Court

of Smith County, Texas (Tr.Ct.No. 007-0343-19)

THIS CAUSE came to be heard on the appellate record and briefs filed herein, 

and the same being considered, it is the opinion of this court that there was no error in the judgment. 

It is therefore ORDERED, ADJUDGED and DECREED that the judgment of 

the court below be in all things affirmed, and that this decision be certified to the court below for 

observance.

Brian Hoyle, Justice.

Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Hoyle, J., and Neeley, J.