Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion ( 1986 )


Menu:
  •                                    The Attorney          General of Texas
    .Ql,ril
    16. 1986
    JIM MATTOX
    Attorney General
    Honorable Mike Dris~:oll          Opinion No. JM-522
    Supreme Court Building         Harris County Attorxy
    P. 0. Box 12546
    Austin. TX. 76711. 2546
    1001 Preston, suite 634           Re:    Whether a justice of the peace
    512/475-2501                   Htiuston.Texas   77~IO2           may accept personal checks in payment
    Telex 9101674-1387                                              'of fines, costs and/or judgments
    Telecopier   512,475.0266
    Dear Mr. Driscoll:
    714 Jackson, Suite 700
    Dallas, TX. 752024506               You ask several questions about the responsibilities of a justice
    214i742.8944                   of the peace in comection with the collection of fines, costs, and
    judgments.
    4624 Alberta Ave.. Suite 180
    El Paso, TX. 799052793
    A justice of the peace has authority to collect money payable
    915/533-3464                   under the Code of Criminal Procedure. Code Grim. Proc. art. 103.003.
    The code provides that all fines and other undertakings whereby a
    party becomes bound to pay the state "shall be collected in the lawful
    ,--I    Texas. Suite 700         money of the United States only." Code Grim. Proc. srt. 43.02
    ,Ston, TX. 77002.3111
    (emphasis added). Your first question is whether those statutes
    7131223-5666
    authorize a justice of the peace to accept a personal check in payment
    of fines, costs, and judgments payable to the state.
    808 Broadway, Suite 312
    Lubbock, TX. 79401.3479             A check is not itself money. See Muldrow V. Texas Frozen Foods,
    608/747-5236
    
    299 S.W.2d 275
    , 27i-78 (Tex. 1957).- A check is generally considered
    to be only conditional payment of an obligation, and mere delivery of
    4309 N. Tenth, Suite S         a check does not discharge an obligation. Meaders V. Biskamp, 316
    McAllen, TX. 76601-1685        S.W.2d 75, 77 (Tex. 1958); 
    Muldrou, 299 S.W.2d at 277
    . A check that
    5121682~4547                   is honored by a payee bank, however, results in the receipt of money.
    See 
    Muldrow, 299 S.W.2d at 278
    . Therefore, under article 43.02 a
    200 Main Plaza. Suite 400      justice of the pe,%ce may accept a personal check as conditional
    San Antonio, TX. 76205.2797    payment of fines, costs or judgments even though the check itself is
    512/225-4191                   not money.
    An Equal Opportunity/
    We note, howewr, that a public official is not bound to accept a
    Affirmative Action Employer    check. Muldrow, 290 S.W.Zd at 278. Also, because delivery of a check
    does not discharge 3 debt, a defendant is not discharged from payment
    of fines and costs :ifhis check is returned unpaid. See Code Grim.
    Proc. art. 43.01 (defendant is discharged from costs and fines when
    they are fully paid:l..
    Your second question is:
    May a justice of the peace discharge his lia-
    bility for the acceptance of-a worthless check in
    p. 2398
    .Bonorable Mike Driscoll - Pa:ge2      (JM-522)
    payment for fines, costs end judgments and for the
    issuance of his official receipt by using due
    diligence to collect same?
    Justices of the peace are accountable for fines they impose and
    judgments they render, and lthey must use due diligence in collecting
    such fines and judgments:
    Fines imposed end judgments rendered by
    justices of the peace shall be charged against the
    justice imposing 1or rendering the same. He may
    discharge indebtc:dnessby filing with the county
    clerk the treasurer's receipt for the amount
    thereof, or by showing to the satisfaction of the
    commissioners court that he has used due diligence
    to collect the usme without avail, or that the
    same have been satisfied by imprisonment or labor.
    V.T.C.S. art. 1619. Your question seems to suggest that a justice of
    the peace incurs a liability other than his liability under article
    1619 if he accepts a check that is not honored. This is not so. As
    far as his own accountability is concerned, a justice of the peace is
    in the same position after he accepts a worthless check from a
    defendant as he is when ha! has received nothing from the defendant.
    His liability stems from ilrticle 1619, not from his acceptance of a
    check. In order to discharge his liability under article 1619 a
    justice of the peace must issue "any and all writs allowed by law to
    enforce collection" of fines and judgments. -   See Attorney General
    Opinions JM-517 (1986); O-6740 (1945).
    Your question also indicates concern about the effect of giving a
    defendant a receipt for a check that is later dishonored. A receipt
    merely signifies that the rlerty giving the receipt has received the
    article mentioned in the receipt. State v. Watkins, 
    87 S.W.2d 184
    ,
    188 (MO. 1935). It is nothing more than evidence that something was
    received, and it is subject to dispute by parol evidence. Humphries
    V. Colorado Life Co., 
    170 S.W.2d 315
    , 318 (Tex. Civ. App. - El Paso
    1942. writ ref'd). Your question assumes that s justice of the peace
    becomes liable for payment of a check simply because he gives a
    receipt for the check. 'Zou offer and we find no basis for that
    assumption. Again, the l.iability of a justice of the peace for
    payment of a fine is the liability provided for in article 1619.
    Article 1619 does not make a justice of the peace a guarantor of a
    check he accepts.    See Nuldrow,
    -   
    --- 299 S.W.2d at 278
    (when check for
    taxes is returned unpaid, secretary of state should cancel record of
    payment and take further st.epsto collect taxes). Of course, to avoid
    disputes over whether payment was in fact made, it would be wise for
    an official giving a receipt for a check to note on the receipt that
    it is for a check and that the check does not discharge an obligation
    unless it is paid in full.
    p. 2399
    Honorable Mike Driscoll - Eage 3 (JM-522)
    Your final question is whether article 1656a. V.T.C.S., gives the
    Harris County Auditor authority to prohibit a justice of the peace
    from accepting personal checks. Article 1656a provides:
    The County Auditor in counties having a popula-
    tion of one hund;xninety      thousand (190,000) or
    more according to the last preceding or any future
    Federal Census she,11prescribe the system of accoun-
    ting for the co;;;;%and the forms to be used by the
    District Clerk, tf,eDistrict Attorney and all county
    and precinct offjTc:ersend by all persons in the
    collection and disbursement of county revenues,
    funds, fees, and all other moneys collected in an
    official capacity%hether belonging to the county,
    its subdivisions cr precincts, or to, or for the use
    or benefit of, an:,person, firm, or corporation; he
    shell prescribe the mode and manner in which the
    District Clerk, the District Attorney and all county
    and precinct officers shall keep their accounts, end
    he shell have the power to require all officers to
    furnish monthly, annual, or other reports under oath
    of all moneys, tsxee. or fees of every nature
    received, disbursed, or remaining on hand; end in
    connection with such reports he shall have the right
    to count the cash on hand with such officer, or to
    verify the amount on deposit in the bank in which
    such officer may ‘have placed the same for safe-
    keeping. He sha:t:t  have the power to adopt and
    enforce such reg&tions    not inconsistent with the
    Constitution and Laws es he may deem essential to
    the speedy and pr'oper collection and checking of,
    and accounting for; the revenues and other funds and
    fees belonging to the county or to any person, firm,
    or corporation fa; whom any of said officers may
    have made collect:E,ns,or for whose use or benefit
    they may have rec#?zd or may hold such funds. All
    of the fees, commissions, funds, and moneys herein
    referred to shal:t be turned over     to the County
    Treasurer by suck, officer as collected, and such
    money shall be deposited in the county depository in
    a special fund to the credit of such officer and
    draw interest for ,thebenefit of the county, which
    funds, when so deposited in such depository, shall
    be secured by the bond of such depository. There-
    after the officer, may draw checks on the County
    Treasurer to disburse said funds in the payment of
    salaries end expenses authorized by law or in
    payment to the county or to the persons, firms, or
    corporations to rhom said funds may belong. The
    Treasurer end the depository shall make no payment
    unless such check is countersigned by the County
    p. 2400
    Honorable Mike Driscoll - Page 4    (JR-522)
    Auditor.   The deposit of funds in the County
    Treasury shall not in any wise change the ownership
    of any fund so df:posited except to indemnify said
    officer and his bondsmen or other owners of such
    funds for such fun,ds during the period of deposit
    with the county. At the close of any fiscal year or
    accounting period amowor hereafter fixed by law, the
    County Auditor sh;Ll audit, adjust, and settle the
    accounts of such officer. In the event the County
    Auditor shall be unable to obtain proper reports or
    an adequate accounting from any District Attorney,
    District Clerk, county or precinct officer as herein
    provided, either during or after his term of office,
    the County Auditor shall have authority to enforce
    an accounting thereof, and to take such steps at the
    expense of the cornty as are necessary in his judg-
    ment to protect tre interests of the county or of
    the persons. firms, or corporations entitled to such
    funds. (Emphasis added).
    We conclude that the Narris County Auditor does not have the
    authority to prohibit justices of the peace from accepting checks.
    Article 1656a does not permit a county auditor to make rules contrary
    to law. and the Texas Supreme Court has held that a public official
    may accept a check as coniitional payment for an obligation that is
    statutorily required to be paid in money. Muldrow v. Texas Frozen
    Foods, 
    299 S.W.2d 275
    (Tex. 1957). Also, we think that the duties and
    obligations of a county auditor under article 1656a concern record-
    keeping and handling of fur.ds. We do not think that a prohibition on
    the acceptance of checks is within that grant of authority.
    SUMMARY
    Under article 43.02 of the Code of Criminal
    Procedure, a justice of the peace may, but is not
    required to, accs:pta check in payment of fines,
    costs, and judgments. When a justice of the peace
    imposes a fine, he is liable for the amount of the
    fine. He may satisfy that liability by issuing
    any writs available to enforce the judgment. The
    Harris County Auditor may not prohibit county and
    precinct officers from accepting checks.
    JIM     MATTOX
    Attorney General of Texas
    p. 2401
    1
    .
    c       Honorable Mike Driscoll - Page 5    (3``522)
    .
    P
    JACK HIGHTOWER
    First Assistant Attorney Gmeral
    MARY KELLER
    Executive Assistant Attorney General
    RICK GILPIN
    Chairman, Opinion Comittec!
    Prepared by Sarah Woelk
    Assistant Attorney General
    p. 2402
    

Document Info

Docket Number: JM-522

Judges: Jim Mattox

Filed Date: 7/2/1986

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 2/18/2017