“Should concurrent fines be discharged concurrently like concurrent terms of confinement?”
Anastassov was convicted of two offenses and, in addition to concurrent terms of imprisonment, the trial court imposed $10,000 fines in each case. The court of appeals held that, because of the concurrent sentencing, the trial court could not assess multiple fines. See State v. Crook, 248 S.W.3d 172 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008). It therefore struck one of the fines.
The State argues that concurrent fines should be treated like concurrent confinement sentences—they should exist independently but discharge at the same time. The State points out that striking one fine contravenes the fact that punishment for both offense was assessed within the applicable ranges. Further, if the conviction or sentence with the fine intact is vacated later on habeas review, Anastassov would no longer be obligated to pay any fine.