                                       In The

                                 Court of Appeals

                    Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont

                           ____________________
                                 NO. 09-19-00076-CR
                           ____________________

                      IN RE WILLIAM DALE PERKINS
________________________________________________________________________

                              Original Proceeding
                 75th District Court of Liberty County, Texas
                      Trial Cause Nos. 32009 and 32258
________________________________________________________________________

                          MEMORANDUM OPINION

      In a mandamus petition William Dale Perkins complains that his inmate

account statement reflects that he owes court fees, presumably from court costs

assessed in one or more of his criminal cases from Liberty County. Perkins asks this

Court to compel the trial court to prohibit the prison system from collecting court

costs from his inmate account.

      To be entitled to mandamus relief, Perkins must demonstrate that he has no

adequate remedy at law through an appeal and that what he seeks to compel is a

ministerial act. In re State ex rel. Weeks, 391 S.W.3d 117, 122 (Tex. Crim. App.

                                         1
2013). Perkins has not shown that he has been charged a fee that is not authorized

by statute, or that cannot be collected if he is indigent. See generally Tex. Code Crim.

Proc. Ann. arts. 42.16 (West 2018) (The judgment “shall also adjudge the costs

against the defendant, and order the collection thereof as in other cases.”); see also

Johnson v. State, 405 S.W.3d 350, 355 (Tex. App.—Tyler 2013, no pet.) (Court costs

other than attorney’s fees were not preconditioned on ability to pay.). Furthermore,

Perkins has not shown that the trial court had a legal duty to perform a ministerial

act, was asked to do so, and failed or refused to act. In re Villarreal, 96 S.W.3d 708,

710 (Tex. App.–Amarillo 2003, orig. proceeding). Additionally, Perkins failed to

demonstrate that he has no adequate remedy by appeal if fees are collected from his

inmate account. See Harrell v. State, 286 S.W.3d 315, 321 (Tex. 2009). We deny the

petition for a writ of mandamus.

      PETITION DENIED.
                                                                   PER CURIAM


Submitted on March 26, 2019
Opinion Delivered March 27, 2019
Do Not Publish

Before McKeithen, C.J., Kreger and Johnson, JJ.




                                           2
