Ezel / AG Opinions / TX
TX JM-443 February 21, 1986

Could Texas impose a new $3 crime-victims court cost on traffic offenses committed before the fee took effect?

Short answer: No. JM-443 concluded that court costs were part of criminal punishment, so applying the new fee to an earlier traffic offense would violate the prohibition on ex post facto laws.

Apply this to your situation

This page answers the general question as of 1986. Ezel answers yours: what it means for your facts, under current Texas law, with citations.

Currency note: this opinion is from 1986
Subsequent statutory amendments, court decisions, or later AG opinions may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context, not current legal advice. Verify current law before relying on any specific rule, deadline, or remedy mentioned here.
Disclaimer: This is an official Texas Attorney General opinion. AG opinions are persuasive authority in Texas courts but are not binding precedent. This summary is for informational purposes only and is not legal advice. The opinion dates from 1986; verify current statutes and case law before relying on it.
About this page: The plain-English summary, reader guidance, and Q&A below were written by Ezel based on the official AG opinion. The original opinion (linked on this page as a PDF) is the authoritative source for any reliance.
View original AG opinion (PDF)

Texas AG Opinion JM-443: Retroactive Traffic Court Costs

Plain-English summary

A 1985 amendment imposed a $3 court cost on certain low-level misdemeanors and removed the prior exemption for traffic offenses under articles 6687b and 6701d. The money went to the Crime Victims Compensation Fund. Source: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1986/jm0443.pdf

JM-443 concluded that the new fee could not be imposed for a traffic offense committed before the amendment's September 1, 1985 effective date. Source: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1986/jm0443.pdf

The opinion treated court costs as part of punishment. A law that increased punishment after the crime was committed was an ex post facto law, so a defendant could be charged only the costs attached to the offense when it occurred. Source: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1986/jm0443.pdf

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1986. Subsequent statutory amendments, court decisions, or later AG opinions may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context, not current legal advice. Verify current law before relying on any specific rule, deadline, or remedy mentioned here.

Common questions

Why did the date of the offense matter?

Because the opinion classified the fee as punishment. The punishment attached to an offense could not be increased by a law enacted after the offense occurred. Source: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1986/jm0443.pdf

What had the earlier law done with traffic offenses?

The prior version expressly exempted traffic offenses under articles 6687b and 6701d from the court cost. The 1985 amendment removed that exemption. Source: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1986/jm0443.pdf

Did the holding depend on the conviction date or offense date?

The offense date. JM-443 said the new fee was inapplicable to offenses committed before September 1, 1985. Source: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1986/jm0443.pdf

Background and statutory framework

The amended article 8309-1 reduced the cost on misdemeanors punishable by a fine of no more than $200 from $12.50 to $3 while extending the charge to the traffic offenses that had been exempt. Source: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1986/jm0443.pdf

JM-443 relied on Texas criminal cases holding that increased punishment and changed legal consequences could not be applied to conduct predating the new law. Source: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1986/jm0443.pdf

Citations and references

  • article 8309-1, V.T.C.S., section 14
  • articles 6687b and 6701d, V.T.C.S.
  • Ex parte Alegria, 464 S.W.2d 868, 872 (Tex. Crim. App. 1971)
  • Ex parte Carson, 159 S.W.2d 126, 129 (Tex. Crim. App. 1942)
  • Hicks v. State, 587 S.W.2d 422, 423 (Tex. Crim. App. 1979)
  • Plachy v. State, 239 S.W. 979, 981 (Tex. Crim. App. 1922)

Source: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1986/jm0443.pdf

Source

Original opinion text

Best-effort transcription from a scanned PDF via OCR. Minor errors may remain; the linked PDF is authoritative.

The Attorney General of Texas

JIM MATTOX
Attorney General

February 21, 1986

Honorable Brad Wright
Chairman
Committee on Public Health
Texas House of Representatives
P.O. Box 2910
Austin, Texas 78769

Opinion No. JM-443

Re: Whether it is unconstitutional to impose the $3 court cost set out in article 8309-1, section 14(b), V.T.C.S., on persons convicted of certain traffic offenses that occurred before September 1, 1985

Dear Representative Wright:

You have asked about recent legislation that imposes a $3 court cost on a person who is convicted of certain traffic offenses. The money is to be paid into the Crime Victims Compensation Fund. V.T.C.S. art. 8309-1, § 14. The prior version of article 8309-1 set a court cost of $12.50 for misdemeanors punishable by a fine of not more than $200. Acts 1983, 68th Leg., ch. 475, at 2764. But persons convicted of a traffic offense under article 6687b, V.T.C.S., or article 6701d, V.T.C.S., were exempted from payment of that court cost. Id. at 2765.

A 1985 amendment reduced the court cost attached to misdemeanors punishable by a fine of not more than $200 from $12.50 to $3, and it eliminated the exemption from the court costs for traffic offenses under articles 6687b and 6701d. The amending act took effect on September 1, 1985. Acts 1985, 69th Leg., ch. 135, at 732.

You ask whether the $3 court cost on traffic offenses under articles 6687b and 6701d can constitutionally be applied to offenses that occurred before September 1, 1985.

It is well settled that a law that inflicts a greater punishment than that annexed to a crime when committed is an ex post facto law. Ex parte Alegria, 464 S.W.2d 868, 872 (Tex. Crim. App. 1971). Court costs are part of punishment. Ex parte Carson, 159 S.W.2d 126, 129 (Tex. Crim. App. 1942). Consequently, upon conviction a criminal defendant can only be charged those court costs that were attached to the offense at the time it was committed. Thus, the $3 court cost cannot be charged in connection with an offense under article 6687b or article 6701d that occurred before September 1, 1985. See Hicks v. State, 587 S.W.2d 422, 423 (Tex. Crim. App. 1979) (application of new Penal Code to offenses committed before its effective date would violate prohibition on ex post facto law); Plachy v. State, 239 S.W. 979, 981 (Tex. Crim. App. 1922) (application of law that changes rule of evidence must be held inapplicable in trial for offense committed prior to effective date of change).

SUMMARY

The $3 court cost provided for in article 8309-1, section 14(b), V.T.C.S., is inapplicable to offenses under article 6687b, V.T.C.S., and article 6701d, V.T.C.S., that were committed before September 1, 1985.

JIM MATTOX
Attorney General of Texas

JACK HIGHTOWER
First Assistant Attorney General

MARY KELLER
Executive Assistant Attorney General

ROBERT GRAY
Special Assistant Attorney General

RICK GILPIN
Chairman, Opinion Committee

Prepared by Sarah Woelk
Assistant Attorney General

Get today's answer for your situation

You just read a 1986 opinion on this question. Ezel checks the current Texas statutes and case law and answers your specific situation, with citations.

Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer cites the law it relies on.