Orlando Salinas v. State
Texas Court of Appeals, 14th District (Houston)
1Concurring in part, dissenting in partMartha Hill Jamison, Justice
I concur with the majority as to the resolution of appellant’s first two issues. However, I would find section 133.102(a)(1) of the Texas Local Government Code to be unconstitutional on its face. Specifically, I would find that none of the funds mentioned in the statute meet the Carson test, despite appellant’s attempted concession on appeal, and the court costs cannot be reallocated. Because the majority holds otherwise, I respectfully dissent.
Consolidated Court Cost
In addition to the numerous assessments associated with the actual cost of a convicted person’s trial; see, e.g., Texas Code of…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- St. Luke's Episcopal Hospital v. AgborTexas Supreme Court · 1997
- Weir v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 2009
- Cates, RussellCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 2013
- Ex Parte CarsonCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1942
- Purchase v. State, Texas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston)2002
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.