Case Information
*1 OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS
AUSTIN
-c.- --
Hon. Robert 3. Allen
County Attorney
rubbook County
Lubbsok, Texas
Duar sir:
oithe Peso "1 have a queeti the dietribu- tion find payment of f
Peaoel.
as-em on.whioh he to bring the total the mimes Juatios of buu on the Uelln- and, In a&lltion to he oould apply the tsee ool- hich were listed ee delinquent hir 19S'? allowance up to the 105tL, C.C.P. grovlbes, *....&.SO by the oounty to the Justlos or the Peace, for each oriminal aotlon tried and FIXALLY DIBP0615D OF BPFWE EIK...' The words ot this statute aem very olear that before a Justice of the Pesos Lo entftZed to $2.SO frcim the county, thr! oetse must be finally disposed OS before him.
Ron. 'iobert LT. Allen, T<ige 2
'article 3892, !?.C.s., provides that any offioer who does not collect the mxinuc amount of his fees for any fisctl year end reporta de- linquent fees that yeer shall be entitled to retain, when colleated, suoh psrt of suoh delinquent fees as is sufficient to complete the amxlm.m oos?ponsetion authorized for the year in which delinquent fee6 were charged, End also retain the eo.ouut of exoess fees authorized by law.
-10 your opinion O-1868, dated Februsry 23, 1940, you state, *Where a defendant pleads ;uilty in a justice oourt but do88 not pay the fine, end a ymr later a newly eleotsd justice iesuea commitment and the defendant is placed In jail end lays out hia fine en4 ooata, the justioe of -he peeoe who took the plee5;E gul:r;y would be entitled to the trial tee.'
statesent seems to be contrary to Article*1032 because under 1052 C.C.P., the Juetloe of the Peaoe would not be entitled to sup payment by the county uhlesa the case wea finally disposed 0r before hid.
'? have advised the Lubbook County Auditor that the $2.50 fee to be paid the Justfoe of,the Peeoe was not due him unless the oese was finally disposed of before him, end a oaee whioh waa tried in 1937, but not finally disposed of until 1938 would be earned es of 1928, and should not -be listed es a delinquent fee due ror 1937.
Vith the above statutes In m,ind, would you kindly give me your opinion es to the answer to the question set out in the firat part of this letter?*
In your letter you state that the Juetice.of the Peaoe granted "deferred e~met$t6* on oriminal oesee nnd list-, ad them as delinquent f e wish to 0~11 your attention to Article 698 of the Code of Criminal Prooedure of Texee, whioh applies to "deferred judgments", whioh reads ea follows:
*On each verdiot cf aoquittal or oonviotfon, *3 Hon. Robert J. Allen, Page 3
the proper judgment shell be entered imzedietely. If acquitted the defendant shall be at once dis- oherged from all further llebfllty UpOn the Oharge which he wee tried; provided that, in miade- meanor cases where there ia returned a verdiat, or a plea of guilty is entered and the punishment assessed is by fine only. the Court nay, on written request of the defendant end for good o(Puse shown, defer judgment uutil 6ome other da3 fixed by order of the Court; but in no event ahell the judgment be deierred for a longer period of time than six (6) monthe. On explretlon of the time fixed by the order cf the Court, the Court or JuIgge thereof, shall enter judgment on the verdlot or plea end the saxe shell executed as provided by Chapter 4, Title 9, of the Code of Criminal Procedars of the State of Texas. Provided further, that the Court or ;YuUge ,thereof, In the exeraiee of sound dlsoretian~leay pemft the defendant where judgment is deferred, to remain at large on hia oyn reooe- nieenoe, or may requfre him to enter Into bond in a mm at least double the amount of the aawesed fine end oosts, oooditioned that the 4efen4ant and joint&y and neverally, vii11 pay suoh fine auretiea, md costs unless the defendant personally appears on the day set tn the order and d~luoherges the judg- rat la the manher provldod by Chapter 4, Title 9 of the Code of Crlmlnal Prooedum of the State of Texas; end for the e.nforceroent of any judgueat en- tered, all writs, proaeeaas and remedies OS the Gode'of Criminal Proaedure are cede applloeble so, X~~~~;eneaessary to oerry out the proofsions of thie
."
We think there is a oleer distinction between the fen% *deSerre8 peymaeatsn and *deferred ju4gments.e -.- 105Z, 0od.e of Crixinel Procedure, rsads as Artiale
f 011OV8 : e'phree Dollar8 shell be paid by the aounty to the CounOy Judge, or Judge of the Court at Law, and Two poller8 end fifty oents shell be p&Id by the oounty to the Justioe of the Peace, for aaoh orimiaal aation tried end finally disposed of before h&s. Frcvided, however', that in all oountiss have a popu- lation 20,000 or less, the Suatioe of the Peeoe shalt *4 Eon. Robert J. Allen, Face 4
reoeive 8 trial tee of Three Xlollar8. Such jndge or Justioe 8hEll present t0 the CO~3Ei881OQ8r8' term thereof, Court of hi8 county at a regular a written aoeount apeoifying 8aoh orlmlnal a&ion in'nhloh he chlm8 8uoh f66, osrtlfied by euoh J~ge or Justloo to be oorreot, and filed with the County Clerk. 'Ph.3 COUilQi88idWr8' Court Ohall approve such acoount for 8uoh amount a8 they find to oorroot, end order a draft to be issued upon the County Treasurer in favor of 8wh Jnd@ or JuGtios ror the amount 80 approved. FrovIQed the Commlssicnsrs* Court shall not pap any aooount or trial fee8 In any Oa80 tried 8X4& in which an ioquittal is had unless t.ha State of Texas w&s .ln,the ,trial~ of 8ald oause by the repreeentsd COlUltp AttOrIIey, OD hi8 a88f.8taIlt, CriloiMl Di8- triOt Attorney or hi.8 688i8t6nt', and the OOrti- floate of 86$d :Attorn6p 16 attoohed to 88id aoootit .otrtifpin& to the feat that said cause w68 tried, an@ thv State 0r Texas was rap~rvrtntvd, and that in.6i8 judgment thert wao ,suirihnt tVid6nO8 in 6aid oau8e t0 @-and a trial Of 86~10.~
OplaiOa 8~. o-616 Of thi8 dtpart&6nt, hold8 that Artdole, 105% @xlt of.Orlminal Fraued%-e of Tbxae, a8 amencted, .l provld68 that the Justice,of the Peaaa shall raoelvs $2.50
ln all countlee hsving a popiilatloa of~mors than 20,000 inhabitant8 for.aaoh uM!ainalaotion .tried and ii&ally diS- DO8ed of befurs him. eueh fee8 to be Dafd.bY the oountY when iuoh claim8 i&e ii&I in ouupl.iance with Ariiole 3052,-Codo OS Crlmiaal froeedure, and that it is Immaterial whether the defendant who is oonvio%ed i.3 such orimiD.al a&ion pay8 his +5nv and costs Oi Work8 his fine and a66t6 outi 011 the oouat.~
ooouaty, or a sufftoient Opinion %a. O-1758 of this department hold8 that the justice of.the e;f=g&e$;r~~~y$ p6lld UpOIl thE.tOll
rbthex in8tead onths rendition of his final judgme&t la tile *5 Eon. Robert J. YUlea, Page 5
by the oounty oourt or by the court Of orlminal appeals. We eMlO herewith OOpie8 of OpiniOn8 308. O-616, o-1759 and O-1868, wElob dtti with variou8 qUVI8tiOU8 rlmllar to pour question.
WE do not hart paas on the propriety Or legalitp or tht Wdererrlng of payment8 * on valid jUdgmd8 Of oon- in Ir;isdameaaor oaat8 by the Justlee of the Feaoe or vlotioa other orfiotrs.
In anawer~t0 your qu6atioa you ar6 rs8peottully advised thet it iS the OpiaiOn Of thi8 dep8rhteat that ii the fustioe of the Peaoe rend6red a valid judgmant oi oon- vlotlon whiah beoama final iwdofar a8 hi8 jurisdio- in 1957, tioa wa8 oonoerned and he did not oolleot his trial fra mce In 1937 frau the aouaty, and reported 88me a8 a delinquent fee for that pear, thtn he would be clearly an- titled to aollect 8661~ from uadar the taot8, ihe oounty, In order to bring his 1937 allomno6 up to the maximum, ra- gardla88 a? whether or not the rim and acsts were aver paid or the ju6gment 8ati8fied by jail seniae Of the d,a- fendat or by the defendant*8 working 88me out oa the oounty fara or other pub110 works. Ii the "$xlgmtnt or oonviotlon” wan dtierred under
Article 698. codt of Criminal Prooedurt. the ~ustlae would not entl&6 to hi8 trial fte until *ha nditterred judg- ment' IV68 rendered, tnttred and beoama final Cl 80 far as the juriediction ot the jurrtfae or the pea08 was ooneernad.
Vary truly youra ATI’CRARY GEMSRAI~ CF TEXAS /