Honorable Patrick J. Ridley County Attorney Bell County P. O. Box 474 Belton, Texas 76513
Re: Construction of the Speedy Trial Act.
Dear Mr. Ridley:
You ask three questions about the application of the Speedy Trial Act to a trial de novo in county court following a conviction in justice or municipal courts. The justice and municipal courts have jurisdiction in misdemeanor cases where the fine does not exceed two hundred dollars. Code Crim. Proc. arts.
A defendant who appeals to the county court for a trial de novo has presumably had a speedy trial pursuant to article 32A.02 in the lower court. Article 32A.02 provides for a speedy trial, not a speedy appeal. However, the appeal from a municipal or justice court vacates the conviction and transfers the charge to the county court as if originally filed there. Code Crim. Proc. art.
The provisions of article 32A.02 describing the commencement of a criminal action do not provide an answer to your question. The Act provides that a criminal action generally commences when an indictment, information, or complaint against the defendant is filed, or when he is arrested to answer for the offense, if earlier. No information is required in the county court on appeal from a justice court conviction, Kneedler v. State,
The appeal to the county court is perfected when the defendant files a valid appeal bond. Code Crim. Proc. art.
You also inquire about the application of article
Section 1. A defendant who is detained in jail pending trial of an accusation against him must be released either on personal bond or by reducing the amount of bail required, if the state is not ready for trial of the criminal action for which he is being detained within:
. . .
(4) five days from the commencement of his detention if he is accused of a misdemeanor punishable by a fine only.
You inquire when the defendant's detention begins within this provisions.
There are two ways to give the county court jurisdiction of an appeal from the justice court. Guenzel v. State,
You finally inquire about the amount by which article 17.151 requires the bail to be reduced. That provision states that the defendant must `be released either on personal bond or by reducing the amount of bail required . . . .' In our opinion, the bail must be reduced to an amount defendant can pay and thereby secure his release. The amount of reduction necessary to release the defendant will depend on the facts of each case. A token reduction of one dollar will not comply with this section's requirement that defendant `be released . . . by reducing the amount of bail required.'
Very truly yours,
John L. Hill Attorney General of Texas
APPROVED:
David M. Kendall First Assistant
C. Robert Heath Chairman Opinion Committee
