The Attorney General of Texas 

April 7, 1980 

MARK WHITE 

Attorney General 

ml Md” Plaza. su,,* 400 

San Antonio. TX. 78205 

.512/-2E-4191 

Honorable Maurice S. Pipkin 

Executive Director 

State Commission on Judicial Conduct 

Austin, Texas 

Dear Mr. Pipkim 

Opinion No. MW-162 

Re: Whether or not a county clerk 

may assess the fees prescribed in 

article 1064, Code of Criminal 

Procedure, in a case in which the 

proceedings have been deferred and 

ultimately dismissed pursuant to 

article~67Old, section 143A. 

You have asked whether the county clerk’s fees provided for in article 

1064? Code of Criminal Procedure, may be assessed in cases where the judge 

in hw discretion defers the proceedings to permit the defendant to complete 

a defensive drivbg course after which the charges are dismissed. V.T.C.S. 

art. 6701d, S 143A. There is no provision for entry of a conviction nor finding 

of guilt. After dismissal the evidence of the original charge may not be used 

for any puqwe-. Id Such a deferred proceeding without entry of guilt has 

been held constitu&al. ‘Baker v. State, 158 S.W. 998 (Tex. Crim. App. 1913). 

Article 1064, Code of Criminal Procedure, provides: 

(0 The clerks of the county courts, county courts at 

law and district courts shall be allowed the followhtg 

fees: 

(a) A fee of Fifteen Dollsrs ($15.00) in each’ cause 

filed in said courts: for filing complaints, 

‘information, for docketing and taxing costs for each 

defendant, for issuing original writs, issuing 

subpoenas, for swearing and impaneling a jury, 

receiving and recording verdict, for filing each paper 

entered in this cause, for swearing witnesses and for 

aR other clerical duties in connection with such cause 

in county and district courts. 

(b) A fee of One Dollar (Sl.00) per psge or part of a 

page, to be paid at the time each order is placed, for 

issuitq each certified copy, transcript or any other 

P. 519 
Honorable Maurice S. Pipkin - Page Two (MW-162) 

paper authorized, permitted, or required, to be issued by said 

county clerk or clerk of county courts or clerk of district courts. 

In a prior opinion this office has determined that the above fee may not be assessed where 

the defendant has been granted a conditional discharge under the Controlled Substances 

Act, article 4476-l5, V.T.C.S., section 4.12. Attorney General Opinion H-1135 (1978). 

Under that Act the accused may be placed on probation without the entry of guilt. The 

fees of article 1064, Code of Criminal Procedure, may be assessed only upon a conviction. 

Attorney General Opinions H-ll35 (l978); -093 Q944). The deferred proceedings under 

the Controlled Substances Act are not appealable since there is no entry of conviction. 

George v. State, 557 S.W.2d 787 (Tex. Crim. App. 1977). 

Section 143A, article 6701d states: 

‘Sec. 143A. (a) When a person is charged with a misdemeanor 

offense under this Act, other than a violation of Section 50 or 51, 

committed while operating a motor vehicle, the courtt 

‘fl) in its discretion may defer proceedings and allow the person 

90 days to present evidence that, subsequent to the alleged act, the 

person has successfully completed a defensive driver’s eomwe 

approved by the Texas Department of. Public Safety or other 

driving safety course approved by the court; or : , 

‘(2) shall defer proceedings and allow the person 90 days to 

present written evidence that, subsequent to the alleged act, the 

person has successfully completed a driving safety course approved 

by the court, if: 

‘(A) the person presents to the court an oral request or written 

motion to take a course; 

‘(B) the person has a valid Texas driver’s Iicense or permit; and 

‘(Cl the person’s driving record as maintained by the Texas 

Department of Public Safety does not indicate successful 

completion of a driving safety course under this subdivision within 

the two years immediately preceding the date of the alleged 

offense. 

‘(b) When the person complies with the provisons of Subsection (a) 

of this se&ion and the evidence presented is accepted by the court, 

the court shall dismiss the charge. 

When a charge is dismissed under this section, the charge may 

not be part of the person% driving record or used for any purpose, 

but the court &all report the fact that a person has successfully 

p. 520 
Honorable Maurice S. Pipkin - Page Three (Mh’-162) 

completed a driving safety course and the date of completion to 

the Texas Department of Public Safety for inclusion in the person’s 

driving record The court shall note in its report whether the 

course was taken under the procedure provided by Subdivision (2) of 

Subsection (a) of this section for the purpose of providing 

information necessary to determine eligibility to take a subsequent 

course under that subdivision.’ 

Althoqh the provision does not explicitly state that the proceedings are deferred “without 

entering a judgment of guilt” as does the provision for conditional discharge under the 

Controlled Substances Act, we believe that section 143A implies that no judgment of 

conviction is entered. The section states that the %mrgen shall be dismissed and makes 

no reference to setting aside a conviction. Therefore we believe the reasoning and 

authorities contained in Attorney General Opinion H-R35 (1978) are applicable to the 

ouestion herein posed and compel us to conclude that the fees may not be assessed. 

SUMMARY 

The fees provided for in article 1064, Code of Criminal Procedure, 

may not be assessed where the misdemeanor proceedhtgs have been 

deferred pursuant to article 67Old, section 143A, V.T.C.S. 

J?wlwY&& 

MARK WHITE 

Attorney General of Texas 

JOHN W. PAINTER, JR. 

First Assistant Attorney General 

TED L. HARTLEY 

Rsecutive Assiitant Attorney General 

Prepared by David B. Brooks 

Assistant Attorney General 

APPROVED: 

OPINION COMMI’lTEE 

C. Robert Heath, Chairman 

David B. Brooks 

Rob Gammage 

Susan Garrison 

Rick Gilpin 

Bruce Youngblood 

p. 521