Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion ( 1968 )


Menu:
  •      Ron. John L. David,                             Opinion No. M- 195
    County Attorney
    Dallam County Courthouse                        Re: "Whether Vernon's Code
    Dalhart, Texas 79022                                 of Criminal Procedure
    authorizes appointment
    of counsel by a magistrate
    for an indigent prior to
    examining trial, how
    indigency is determined,
    and the proper fees and
    I                 investigation expenses
    to be paid by a county
    Dear Mr. David:                                      in relation thereto.
    Your recent request for an opinion of this office presents
    the following questions:
    1. Whether  a magistrate is authorized to appoint counsel
    for an indigent at the time such accused is brought before him
    following arrest?
    ~2.      Whether the county is authorized to pay a fee to such
    attorney          appointed by the magistrate?
    3.  What constitutes 'indigency so as to require appointment
    of    counsel for an accused?
    4. Whether a court-appointed, non-resident attorney in a
    capital case is entitled to'reimbursement for expenses such as
    travel,  room and board?
    Regarding your first question, Article 14.06* provides the
    following:
    *Unless otherwise noted, all Articles cited herein refer
    to Vernon's Code of Criminal Procedure.
    ..
    -931-
    .,   .``        ,...         ,.         .           .~   ,.
    Hon.   John   L. David, Page 2 (M-195)
    “In each case enumerated in this Code, the
    person making the arrest shall take the person
    or have him taken without unnecessary delay be-
    fore the magistrate who may have ordered the
    arrest or before some magistrate  of the county
    where the arrest was made without an order.
    The magistrate shall immediately perform the
    &ties described in Article 15.17 of this Code."
    (Emphasis added).
    Article 15.17 reads as follows:
    "In each case enumerated in this Code, the
    person making the arrest shall without unnecessary
    delay take the person arrested or have him taken
    before some magistrate of the county where the
    accused was arrested. The magistrate shall inform
    in clear language the pp
    accusation against him and of any affidavits filed
    therewith, of his right to retain counsel, of
    his right to remain silent, of his right to have
    an attorney present during any interview with
    peace officers or attorneys representing the
    State, of his right to terminate the interview
    at any time, of his right to request the appoint-
    ment of counsel if he is indigent and cannot
    'a'ffo'rdcounsel, and of his rrght to have an exam-
    "ing trial. He"shal1 also inform the person
    a&s&d      -thaf~he"is not required to make a state-
    ment and that anv statement made bv him mav be
    used against him: The magistrate shall aliow the
    person arrested reasonable time and opportunity
    to consult   counsel and shall admit the person
    arrested to bail if allowed by law." (Emphasis added.)
    Magistrates may appoint counsel for an indigent at an
    examining trial by virtue of Article 16.01, which provides
    as follows:
    "When the accused has been brought before a
    magistrate for an examining trial that officer
    shall proceed to examine into the truth of the
    accusation made, allowing the accused, however,
    sufficient time to procure counsel. In a
    -932-
    Hon. John L; David, Page 3   (M-195)        I
    proper case, the magistrate may appoint counsel
    to represent an accused in such examining triar
    on&;,``e"   comp.ensated,,as
    otherwise provided r
    The accused in any felony case shall
    have the right to an examining trial before indict-
    ment in the county having jurisdiction of the
    offense, whether he be in custody or on bail, at
    which time the magistrate at the hearing shall
    determine the amount or sufficiency of bail,
    if a bailable case." (Emphasis addend.)
    Article 2.09 designates who magistrates are within the
    meaning of the Code:
    "The judges of the Supreme Court, the judges
    of the Court of Criminal Appeals, the judges off
    the District Court, the county judges, the judges
    of the county courts of law, judges of the county
    criminal courts, the justices of the peace, the
    mayors and recorders and judges of the city courts
    of incorporated cities or towns."
    Whenever an investigation and interrogation centers on
    an accused, his rights tb an attorney shall be accorded to
    him upon request; and once such request is made, no further
    interrwation mav take olace in the attornev's absence.
    '.Escobe& v. Illinois, li~L.ed 2d 977, 94 S.k. 1759, 370 U.S.
    WInMiranda              v. Arizona, 16 L.ed 2d 694, 
    86 S. Ct. 1602
    , 
    384 U.S. 4n
    966)    , the United States Supreme~Court imposed
    a dutv on arrestinc officers to warn the accused at the time he
    is taken into "custody" and before interrogation begins of his
    right to counsel, and, if hendigent,      his right to have the
    court appoint him counsel.
    Since Article 16.01 specifically authorizes magistrates
    to appoint an attorney to represent an accused in a proper case
    at an examining trial, and Article 15.17 charges magistrates with
    the duty'of informing such accused of his rights to appointed
    counsel, it is our opinion that a magistrate has the duty to
    to appoint anattorney for an indigent accused person -if
    requested.
    We are supported in this conclusion by the requirements
    set forth by the United States Supreme Court in Escobedo v.
    
    Illinois, supra
    and Miranda v. 
    Arizona, supra
    .
    -933-
    Hon. John L. David, Page 4 (M-195)
    Your next question concerns whether the county is
    authorized to pay an attorney who was appointed at a magistrate's
    hearing immediately following arrest to assist an accused who
    is "too poor to employ counsel."    Article 26.05 provides a
    schedule for payment to counsel appointed to defend a person
    accused of a felony or a misdemeanor punishable by imprisonment
    for each day in trial court representing the accused. Also,
    Article 16.01 provides thatan attorney appointed to represent
    the accused in an examining trial shall be compensated as
    otherwise provided In the Code. In Attorney General's Opinion
    No. C-654 (1966), this office stated that attorneys appointed
    tb represent an accused in an examining trial were entitled to
    be compensated in accordance wzth provisions of Article 26.05.
    It is our opinion that the first appearance "in trial court"
    would be the appearance at the examining trial.
    We find no authority in the laws of this state for payment
    of fees to an attorney appointed by a magistrate to assist an
    accused indigent other than when appearing in court either in
    examining trials or in other trials and in conducting an appeal.
    See Article 26.05.
    'i
    The Commissioners Court is one of limited jurisdiction
    and has only such powers as are conferred upon it by the
    statutes and constitution of this state, whether by express
    terms or by necessary implication. Section 18, Article V,
    Constitution of Texas; Article 2351, Vernon's Civil Statutes;
    Bland v. Orr, 
    90 Tex. 492
    , 
    39 S.W. 558
    (1997); Mills v. Lampasas
    
    90 Tex. 603
    , 
    40 S.W. 403
    (1897); Anderson vi Wood, 137
    %%    01, 152 S,W.2d 1084 (1941); Canales v. Laughlin, 
    147 Tex. 169
    , 214 S.W.Zd 451 (1948); Starr County v. Guerra, 297 S.W.Zd
    379 (Tex.Civ.App. 1956, no writ); Von Rosenberg v. Lovett, 
    173 S.W. 508
    (Tex.Civ.App. 1915, err.ref.
    Your
    opinion that when a magistrate appoints counsel for an
    indigent at the time such accused is brought before him following
    arrest, the county is without authority to pay such attorney
    for his assistance rendered prior to appearance "in trial court."
    In answer to your third question, it is our opinion that
    whether an accused person is indigent and cannot afford counsel
    is a fact issue for determination by the magistrate or court
    requested to appoint counsel for an accused. This office does
    not render opinions resolving fact ,issues. A. G. Opinion M-187
    (1968). You are further advi~sedthat a magistrate shall require
    -934-
    Hon. John L. David, Page 5 (M-195)
    an accused person to file an affidavit and receive evidence
    and testimony concerning the facts of his indigency and inability
    to afford counsel.
    Article 26.04 provides   in   part as follows:
    "(a) Whenever the court determines at an
    arraignment or at any time prior to arraign-
    ment that an accused charged with a felony or
    a misdemeanor punishable by imprisonment is
    too poor to employ counsel; the court shall
    oint one or more practicing attorneys to
    i%ZiiThim.    In makina the determination, the
    court shall require the accused to file an
    affidavit, and may call witnesses and hear any
    relevant testimony or other evidence."
    (Emphasis added.)
    While there is no provision requiring filing of an
    affidavit by the accused, other than set forth in Article
    26.04, it is our opinion that a magistrate requested to appoint
    counsel for an accused may require the filing of an affidavit
    to such facts of indigency, and hear testimony or other evidence
    in making the determination as to whether the accused is indigent
    and should have counsel appointed for him.
    It is pointed out that under the holdings of Escobedo
    v. 
    Illinois, supra
    ,~and Miranda v. 
    Arizona, supra
    , a magistrate
    should exercise caution in denvins appointment of counsel when
    requested by an accused becaus; ail further proceedings against
    the accused may become a nullity should the accused later prove
    that he wa6 an indigent, had requested counsel, and was refused
    same.
    You next ask whether an out-of-county counsel appointed
    to represent an indigent in a capital case is entitled to
    reimbursement for expenses'such as travel, room and board.
    Whether appointed counsel is entitled to reimbursement for these
    expenses depends upon the purpose for which they were incurred.
    Article 26.05 provides that a court-appointed counsel shall
    be paid "For expenses incurred for purposes of investigation and
    expert testimony, not more than $250. (Emphasis added.)
    -935C
    Hon. John L. David, Page 6 (M-195)
    It is the opinion of this office, therefore, that if the
    purpose of the travel, lodging and board is for investigatory
    purposes, appointed counsel are entitled under the provisions
    of Article 26.05 to reimbursement for actual expenses incurred
    and paid by him including expense of expert testimony in a
    sum not to exceed $250.00.
    On the other hand,   if the purpose which necessitated the
    incurring of the expenses   for travel, room and board for the
    out-of-county counsel was   not investigatory in nature, but
    is for attending trial in   court, it is the opinion of this office
    that said attorney is not   entitled to reimbursement for these
    expenses.
    SUMMARY            /.
    1. If requested, a magistrate  has a duty to
    appoint an attorney for an indigent accused
    person at the time such accused is brought
    before him following arrest.
    2. The county is not authorized to pay an
    attorney who was appointed by a magistrate
    to assist an indigent person, except in those
    cases where statutory authority exists for
    such payment, i.e. the examining trial, the
    actual trial itself, or an appeal.
    3. Whether an accused person is indigent
    is a fact issue for determination by the
    magistrate or court requested to appoint
    counsel for such an accused. A magistrate,
    however, may require the accused person to
    file an affidavit and may receive other
    evidence and testimony concerning the facts
    of his indigency and inability to afford
    counsel.
    4. Counsel appointed under the provisions
    of Article 26.05, Vernon's Code of Criminal
    Procedure, to represen~tan indigent person'
    in a capital case is not entitled to reim-
    bursement for travel, room and board in
    connection with the trial of such accused,
    -936-
    Hon. John L. David, Page 7 (M-195)
    but is entitled to reimbursement for
    actual expenses incurred and paid by
    him for purposes of investigation and
    expert testimony in a sum not to exceed
    $250.00.
    truly yours,
    Prepared by Monroe Clayton and
    Robert E. Owen
    Assistant Attorneys General
    APPROVED:
    OPINION COMMITTEE
    Hawthorne Phillips, Chairman
    Kerns B. Taylor, Co-Chairman
    W. V. Geppert
    Lonny Zwiener.
    Harold Kennedy
    Jack Sparks
    STAFF LEGAL ASSISTANT
    A. J. Carubbi, Jr.
    -937-
    

Document Info

Docket Number: M-195

Judges: Crawford Martin

Filed Date: 7/2/1968

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 2/18/2017