Bryan Keith Jerrell v. The State of Texas--Appeal from 320th District Court of Potter County (majority)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
NO. 07-11-0111-CR
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
AT AMARILLO
PANEL B
JANUARY 17, 2012
BRYAN KEITH JERRELL,
Appellant
v.
THE STATE OF TEXAS,
Appellee
_____________________________
FROM THE 320TH DISTRICT COURT OF POTTER COUNTY;
NO. 50,264-D; HONORABLE DON R. EMERSON, PRESIDING
Memorandum Opinion
Before QUINN, C.J., and CAMPBELL and HANCOCK, JJ.
Appellant Bryan Keith Jerrell was adjudicated guilty of indecency with a child by
exposure after pleading true to allegations he violated his probation, and he was
sentenced to four years incarceration in the Department of Criminal Justice. He argues
that 1) his punishment is cruel and unusual because he is mentally retarded, and 2)
there is no evidence to support an order to pay attorney’s fees.
judgment and, as modified, affirm it.
We modify the
Cruel and Unusual Punishment
In his first issue, appellant contends that sentencing him to incarceration in an
adult prison when he functions at the level of a seven-year-old constitutes cruel and
unusual punishment. Appellant did not raise this issue to the trial court.1 The failure to
do so waives the issue. Ham v. State, No. 07-09-00331-CR, 2011 Tex. App. LEXIS
8572, at *15 (Tex. App.–Amarillo October 27, 2011, no pet.).
Imposition of Attorney’s Fees as Costs
In his other issue, appellant claims the trial court erred in ordering him to pay
costs which included attorney’s fees because there is no evidence that he is capable of
paying them. Appellant was ordered to pay costs in the judgment, and the clerk’s bill of
costs included $600 in attorney’s fees. The record shows that appellant had appointed
counsel for trial and that he had no means to pay an attorney on appeal. When the
record does not show that the defendant is financially capable of paying attorney’s fees,
the trial court errs in ordering reimbursement in the judgment. See Mayer v. State, 309
S.W.3d 552, 556-57 (Tex. Crim. App. 2010).
Accordingly, we modify the judgment to delete any obligation to pay attorney’s
fees in the amount of $600 and, as modified, affirm it.
Brian Quinn
Chief Justice
Do not publish.
1
In his motion for new trial, appellant alleged that his mental functioning rendered him unable to
intelligently enter a plea and made him incompetent for trial and that he was deprived of effective
assistance of counsel due to his trial counsel’s failure to raise those issues.
2
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
