Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion ( 1984 )


Menu:
  •                                       The Attorney           General        of Texas
    June 13. 1984
    JIM MATTOX
    Attorney General
    Supreme Court Sulldlng            Honorable Joe Warner Bell                     Opinion lo. JM-165
    P. 0. Box 12543
    Auatln. TX. 78711.2548
    Trinity County Attorney
    51214752501                       P. 0. Box 878                                 Re: Whether a defendant whose
    Telex 9101874.13B7                Groveton, Texas    75845                      adjudication was deferred under
    Telecopier 5121475.0266                                                         section 3d of article   42.13 of
    the Code of Criminal Procedure
    714 Jackson, Sulto 7W                                                           may be compelled to pay a fine
    Dall#& TX. 75202.4500                                                           after his period of probation
    2141742-0844                                                                    has expired
    Dear Hr. Bell:
    4B24 Alberll Ave.. suite 150
    El P~aoo.TX. 78805.2783
    9lC5633.3484                            You have asked:
    If a defendant whose edjudlcaiion   was deferred
    c’-  V Texacl. Salts 700                        upon a plea of guilty pursuant to article      42.13.
    .mslon, TX. 77002.3111
    section    3d of the Code of Criminal Procedure,
    713/223-5555
    fails    to pay his     fine,  once his   period    of
    supervision   has expired, may a capias pro fine or
    508 Broadway. Sulle 312                       writ of execution   be issued to enforce payment?
    Lubbock. TX. 78401.3479
    5OBi747.5238
    Assuming that no proceedings     to revoke probation  or determine guilt
    have been initiated.  we conclude that a defendant whose adjudication
    4309 N. Tenth. Suite B            was deferred under article   42.13, section 3d. V.T.C.S.,  is not subject
    t&Allen, TX. 7850%1885            to an execution for collection    of a fine imposed as a condition of his
    5121882-4547                      probation o&e his probationary period has expired.
    200 Main Plaza, Suite 400               Section 3d of article  42.13 of         the   Code of   Criminal    Procedure
    San Antonlo, TX. 782052707        provides in pertinent part as follows:
    512l22541Sl
    (a)    [Wlhen in its opinion the beet Interest of
    An Equal Oppoftunlly/
    society     and the defendant       will   be served,   the
    Alflrmative Action Employer               court may, after receiving         a plea of guilty or a
    plea of nolo contendere, hearing the evidence, and
    finding     that it     substantiates     the defendant’s
    guilt,   defer further proceedings       without entering
    an adjudication      of guilt and place the defendant
    on probation       for   a period      as the court     may
    prescribe,     not to exceed the maximum period of
    imprisonment prescribed       for the offense    for which
    the defendant ie charged.         The court may impose a
    fine applicable       to the offense     and require    any
    reasonable      terms end conditions         of probation,
    p. 726
    Ronorable   Joe Warner Bel.1 - Page 2            (JM-165)
    including  any of the conditions      enumerated            in
    Sections 6. 6a, and 6c of this Article   . . . .
    .   .   .   .
    (c)  On expiration    of a probationary      period
    imposed under Subsection    (a) of this section,      if
    the court has not proceeded       to adjudication     of
    guilt,   the court shall    dismiss  the proceedings
    against     the   defendant    and    discharge      the
    defendant , . . .
    Article     43.03       provides   that
    (a)  If a defendant is sentenced to pay a fine
    or costs or both and he defaults    in payment, the
    court may order     him imprisoned   in jail  until
    discharged as provided by law . . . .
    Article    42.02 defines a sentence as “that part of the judgment . . .
    that orders       that the punishment be carried             into execution     in the
    manner prescribed       by law.”      Article    42.01 defines     a judgment as the
    court’s    written declaration       of conviction      or acquittal.    Section 2 of
    article     42.13 defines       probation     to include     the suspension     of the
    imposition       of   sentence.       Likewise,      section    3d(a)   quoted    above
    describes      probation     as being        based    on the postponement        of   an
    adjudication      of guilt.     The imposition      of a fine under section 3d(a).
    therefore,      Is as a condition           of probation,     not as a part of a
    sentence.      See also 16(8) (providing           that payment of a fine may be
    made on condition       of probation).         Section 3d(c) unequivocally       states
    that a defendant must be discharged and the proceedings                  dismissed if
    the court has not “proceeded              to adjudication      of guilt”   before    the
    “expiration      of a probationary       period imposed under Subsection         (a) of
    this    section . . . .‘I        Black’s     Law Dictionary      39 (5th ed.       1979)
    defines adjudication        as “[t]he    formal giving or pronouncing a judgment
    or decree in a cause; also the judgment given.”                 Compare Burton, Legal
    Thesaurus 11 (1980).
    Hence, by the explicit     terms of section   3d, a defendant whose
    probationary   period under article   42.13 has expired without institu-
    tion of proceedings   to revoke probation or determine guilt may not be
    subjected    to an execution   for collection    of a fine   imposed as a
    condition of probation.
    SUMMARY
    A defendant whose adjudication     was postponed
    pursuant to section   3d of article    42.13 of the
    Code of Criminal Procedure after a plea of guilty
    and who fails to pay a fine imposed as a condition
    of probation  may not be subject    to a capias pro
    p. 727
    ,    .
    Eooorable   Joe Wsrner Bell    - Pege 3 (J?4-165)
    fine or other writ of execution to enforce payment
    of such fine once his period of supervision       has
    expired,  if proceedings   to revoke probation     or
    determine guilt have not slready been instituted.
    -Jzh
    MATTOX
    Attorney    General of Texas
    TOMGREEN
    First Assistant   Attorney    General
    DAVID R. RICHARDS
    Executive Assistant Attorney      General
    Prepared by Colin Carl
    Assistant Attorney General
    APPROVED:
    OPINIONCOMMITTEE
    Rick Gilpin, Chairman
    Jon Bible
    Colin Carl
    Susan Garrison
    Jim Moellinger
    Nancy Sutton
    p.   728
    

Document Info

Docket Number: JM-165

Judges: Jim Mattox

Filed Date: 7/2/1984

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 2/18/2017