Case Information
*1 OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS
AUSTIN
Naroh 81, 1939 HOE. W. AL Tuoker Attorney a0wy
%.llin@m, Texas
Lear Sir:
unty, Psxwihar. a pepulatlcm a last prsga5lag te48ml d.a5osounor sad h!lu Qtmluhmonb 16 asueeaod at a poouaiary fine, ii he is usable to pay tins an5 oestu adju5~5 againat hi+ ho may for mob-the es till 8eaElcii the $aQpnont k put to uo* to the wo2! kh ouao or on Ishe aotMty far&, or pubHo ii~~~rown& *2 Hon. W. U. Tnoker, aarch 21, 1939, Page 2
of the ocunty, as provided in the suooeed- 1x1~ Artiole, or if there be no suoh work- house, farpl or Improvements, he shall be impriscned in Jail for a sufficient length of time to disaharge the in11 amount of flw and oosta adjudged against him; rating sooh labor or lmprlsonmnt at Three Dollars ($3) for each day thereof; provided, how- war, that la all aoant%es In this Stat0 aQntainiry, a pQpul+iQa OiaQt l.M thu tmaty-foe thQw$aa *, aa5m6 '*i&hty W4~16OJ aor8o~~thaatpeat~iour tbeaudd two aIQ#5rd ol4;ao)~"or la aiy aotit1.i fifty (7,150); ul5 lli OoontiM 0oateiI.L~ l papalden of not 1088 thn tairt~ t-a
ung han5a-d an& MTO~ {30,707).nor~+3ra thamthirtyth- mwen&tmalrd~ aSm (30ro,70S)& aad ln wantiu aontnlalag a pepuln- tlon oi not lam thaa twatpe+ena thoman4 rin huu5.rea rorty4d.80 (27,849) nor - than twmy-08nn th0tm3a rit0 -4 rirtp
cma (Z7 SSll; 8ad in oountiea qoitaln* a p0pd0n or 1~8 thrn aw00a thoound ate h-5 (lS,lS8) nor mere tmmty~l&ht than nlnekeathowan5 QM l1wlre5ththir3j- (19 lS0); am5 ln oountle8 ooatelnlog a pqm- l&on of not leu thaa eIghtem tWun& el&ht hundred iI.ftpnbm (16;SSP) aor mare than ai6htOOn thoumad 8iX hw&l'& 8%Xty+IM *3 Eon. 2.. 2. T-uoker, Marah 21, 1939, Fage 3
(18,661); end in oountiee oontalninp, a population of not less than ten thousand and thirteen (10,013) nor score than ten thousand snd fifteen (10,015), according to the last preceding Federal Census, when a defecdant is aonvioted of a misdemeanor anti hls punishment is assassed at a peoun- iary fine, if he is unable to pay the fine, If he 18 unable to pay the tine and oosts adjndga5 against him, ho may ~OZ suoh tlms as will satisfy the jrddpunt be put to work In the workhouss or on the county faa, or publio i.aprcmmonts at the asunty, as pro- vided In the suooss5Isg Artlole, or If taers bs no suoh Workhouss, ran or Smprsvamsnts, he.shall bs laprlsoue5 la jail tor.s~mcffl- oient lssgth of tlm ts 5lsshargs the Sull aaouut or flse asd~oosts a5 ~%$~*s;st him, rating suoh labsr as5
at not lsss than One Dollar 1) per day +i nor aora than Three Dollars( 1 S) psr day.
"Tha.OmalssionorwOourt of aaah sush oounty as. deflnsd by papolstion braoksts abws In this State, at ssy rqular or spssial km, shall, by emler ra50 and sntsrad Is the minutes or said COurt, dstsnlns the rats or WA&S to ba pal5 ssnviots Is their re- epaotln oousties for lsbor or Saprisonment per day In aaoordanoa hemIth.W
ArtIols 793 the Oods of Orinisal Prsssdurs In 1923 provided that uhss a defeqlant is ooafIots5 of a misdemeanor and his punishment Is aases8e5 et a peouniary rim and that If ha is unable to pay t.b fins and ooats adju5gad agafnst him that ha aoul.5 satisfy the fine and oosts b]r Imprfssnmant In Jail or by bsIng put to work in the workhouse sr on county farr sr publio Improvamsnts of the oosnty, rating suoh labor or ImprIsonmeat at $3.00 isr eaoh day tharsof. !PhIs art1010 was amended by tha Asts sf 19t7, (0th bg18tia- turn First Called Sssalos, page 194, ohaptar 68, Ebotjon 1, by rsdnolng the rate irOn $sioO:par day to.Q.00 per day. This art1010 was again%msmds5 by *4 Hon. 'Z. r:. Tucker, i:arch 21, 1939, Page 4
tti .9&a of 1934, 43rE Le6$slature, Second Called S~SS~OII, page 85, ohnpt.cr ?z, sect3on& by chnnglnr the rate from c1.m per day t,o Y3.0~3 per day. This article was agaln amended by the 4ats OP 1937, 45th LesZslnturc, 1st Called Session, House Ml1 45, Seotion 1, which is the present law above set out. It will be noted thet the present
Article 793, Px?e oi Criminal Procedure provides generally that the rate ehall he $3.00 throughout the State, but there are IIUWNWUS sxoeptlona uhhioh apply to oonntiea oi oertaln papolatlon btaokets. DollIn&awmth Comty, !Pemm does not oome withia sny or the population bnokets set out In nttlole 793 and. thereiora, the &wirra+wl rata of $3.00 Is applloable to OollIn6swwth Cotmty.
ArtIole 79%. 794a, 794b, 7940 an5 7945 oi tha Uods of CrImInal Pmoedmo am not applIoabl0 to Oolllry~- rorth County, Texes beoauso C)ollin@Wrth County 50as n0t . zg;0E;hIa any ot the pqmlatlon breoksts nam5 la ui5
.
ArtlOla OeO Of tha CO50 OS Criminal PN0a5IUa ot Texas reads as r0rm8:
*& defendant plaoed In jail 011 soooant or railurs to pay tbo-tine and oosts aan be dlsohargad on heb0as OorpUS by shhorlm@
"1.. That he is tdo poor to pay the rim
snd ooats, and
That he has remained in jail a surfi-
0tOe*&th of tiab to 80ti8ry the rin0 and oosts, at-the rate of three dollars for eaoh day*
*But the defendant shall* In no oese mdor this .artiole, be dlsohsrged until he hae bean hprlmne5 at least ten daya; and a justioe of the pea58 nay discharge the de+ndant upon hI8 the same oause, by applloatioa t0 SUOh #horiB Justl00; and when mob appliaatlon Is grantadd justlae shall note the same oii his dookoteu ~~%Iols oeo tba Oo50 or Orklnal Prooodur0 -Or T~XLUB is toun4 In ohapter 2 or title ll W the Code
Hon. kV. 2. Tucker, Karch 21, 1939, Page 5 of CrIminel Froaedu*.e of Texas w?ifah relates to JUs- tioe aourts. t&lo18 :Toie of ~rimlnsl 920 of the l'rooedure, therercre, relates particularly ati applies particulerly tci justice courts.
Xe have corefiilly considoreE the fo:loring
cases cited by you In your able brief, towit:
Ex Farte Fernandes, 57 SK (2nd) 578 2x Parta I'olly, 12 sn' (2nd) 16 16x Parte Rowler, 15 SW (2nd) 1115 Ex Parte Baptlnatall, 39 6sl (2nd) 95 au&me have reaahed the aoaaluslon that there is no ooa- rllot between these oases.
¶%a Rowley oasa raa daolded Yaroh ZQ, 1989, whonthe 1989 awn&e6 atdate wmi in ru roroe and er- root whloh provided the rate of $l.Oa per day for jail wrrlos or work upon the ooimty farm or othar Impmna- The Ex Part8 Polly aasa was deolded February writs. atwhleh time the 1989 amended artlola wa8 W.1929, ia rtm for08 and arr~etwhloh provldad for the 41.00 per day rate aboreiwntloned. The ISr Parta Xepfindall oass wee dsoldsd on the 10th day of June, 1931, at the 1939 amended atiole In roll rm80 whfoh-time vaa and erreot whIoh prmlded for the $1.00 per day rats ahovwentlonsd~ In eaoh oi *e nbom oases, Ex Parta Polly, 6x Psrte Rowley and Ex Parts Reptl~stall, the data of the orfanses of whioh the defendants were eon- rioted was after the date ot the passage or the amended awage of the amended aot aot of 1929 and prior to the of 1954, and. therefore, the 1.00 per day rats legally i: applied. In neither of these thme oneeta was oon-
vtotion In the justiae eowt.
The oase of Er Parte Fernaadez, 59 5U (2nd)
598 ma d&aided February 15, 1955, by the Court of Texas; the rslator, Fernandes, was Crhlnal Appeals.of oonrieted In JoMoe eoort of a misdemeanor and his pwltihment aaaeesed at e iine of $50.00 and co&S, amounting to $16.00. The quwtlon in this ease was whether or not the relator should be allowed $5.00 per day or $1.00 per day fsr hI8 serv100 in Jail.
Bon. K. ?A:. Tucker, Karch 21, 1939, Pace 6 '
The court held In this ease that Article 920 of the C&e of Criminal Proaedure was mandatory and the relator was allowed $3.00 per day for his aer- ricea In jail. Thia opinion dIstinguIshed this aasa from the Zx Parte Folly case by saying that t3e oon- vlction in tt!e Polly case was In the El Peso County Ccurt at Law. It dlstIngu*shed the Er Parte RI11 ease by saying thtt t>c conviction wes in the 3istrIot Ccurt of Falls Ccunty, Texas. It dIstinGuished the Er Parte Howler Case by saying that the oonrlofion wee In the County Court at Law of Wlohlta County. stated as followsr
The court farther Y'hs chapter In which artlole OZO, rrupra, appears Is oos bavIng reference to a Judgeaat or aonvIotIon in a arImIna1 action behre a justtao afthc peaae.
-am what has bean @aid It 1s apparent t?mt ektntory waatawts make a die- tlnotion on, the wbjaot In hand rith ro-.
farwoo to the oonvlotion ai a nlsd~or baiora the Juatlae of tha paaoe and the oonrIotIon of a mlsdamaanor ln oonrt* higher jurIsdIotIon. The raaBon for
the dIstInotlon pay bs only a matter oi oon jcotura . Slnoa the statutory direction wao deiInIts In Its terara, the duty or the oourt to apply It as writton Is mandatory.
Kowerer, it ray ba raid that the juatlea oourts are limited by the Oonstltutlon (art& ale 5 Para. 19 In oririndl~a to a fin8 exceeding i ZOO, while un4cr atilols 5, pam. 16, other oourts are gi~an ~urIsdIotIon in lniedemeanors of muoh higher grade and with penalti es far more severe.
?From the foregoing, It ia plain that relator having bean oonvIoted In tira oourt, being too poor to pay his justioe fine, end having remained In jail more than ten days and ior a tIme eufficient to dis- aharge his fine, It Is thought that the reletor'o appllaation for a writ Of habeas ./ oorpus should haves been granted."
. : *7 Hon. W. Ii. Tuoker, Uaroh 21, 1939, Page 7
It will be noted that in the Es Parte Feruan- dez case that the oourt olearly recognized the prinoiple that a person xho had been oonoioted of a misderrmanor in the Justice court and who wss sarving his time in Jail must remain in Jail at l.east ten days and Sor a time sufficient to disoharge his fine.
In answer to your first question, you are re- spectfully advised that it is the opinion of this Dapart- ment that 3Z.03 per day is the proper rate for allowanoe or osedit to be given prisoners who have been oonvioted of miodemeaaoro for oomIng tire In jail for working out their fines as prod&d by law la Oolllagow0rth a0my, ~0~00. Itlo the furthoropInlon or this Do- portmont tb0t ArtI MO of the Code or arwl Preoo- dure of Texoo a plIoo only to eonVIotIono obtaInad,In ut the oamo IO nandatary OS appllod to justloo ooart8 g juotioe soarto. for oromplo, A. 8. md a u.m ill oen- r2otod I8 just100 sotdo ror mIoaem0aaor. A*O rim urd soots amoust .~~.&S.OO; Bye ilie uxd aooto emomt to #O&O crud&w moidtto $4SAO. War oad~0oto Irtl010 QW dth0 aodo Of aririnil ProaOQ-, oMO@I sol& art1010 allouo &MO per day ror Jail 0orvi00, till artIola'?arthor p&doe 8 mInIam of tea days ImprIm- moat. A must l orvo tbo iinimtm of ton days; B mot oorve ton days. B'o iIne and ooot6 mt to #SO.OO, whloh d$vldod by #SAO would moko tan days. 6.0 fine and oootoamouatto(4S&O; ho Is allowed #f!LOO per days ho must servo flftooa days.
With rororonoe to your oeoond qrrootlon, uo rind that c~ili~orth a0Qnty &OS 008~0 within the population braakoto oi any emoption whioh would give tho OoamIooIonero* Court authority to doteamIne wages of prIoonors for lobor, Jail aorrIo0 or Imprloon- mont and your oeoond quwtloa, thorefora, IO roopeot- fully answered In the negaative.
Very truly your0 WJRAW
ATTOBXBY GEHlcRAL OF TIEx89