Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion ( 1966 )


Menu:
  • Hon. Don Nugetit                  Opinion No. c-634
    Dlstrlct``Attornel
    109th Judi&el' Diatrlct~:         Re:    Questions relating to the
    P:O. BOX 1076 ~.'                       ~clvll and criminal enforce-
    Kermit, Texas                            ment of support orders, and
    to Article 2328b-4, Vernon's
    Civil Statutes, Acts 59th
    Legislature, 1965, Chi 679,
    'page 1561, ,the new Texas
    'Uniform Reciprocal Enforce-
    war Mr. Nug&t’:.’,~:.I
    I:.’                 ment of Subport'Act.
    You:-hatiti.tiei@etited
    our oplnlon as to the answers to
    questions'-rel%ting,to;,fne.
    civll~'iand~criminalenforcement of
    support order&'andj.to.Artlcle 2328b-4, ‘Vernon'.s'Civil Sta-
    tutes, Acts. 59th Legislature, 1965, Ch. 679, page~l561, the
    new Texas Unlf+r@'Reciprocal &$orcemen$ of Support Act.
    ,~, .,
    Your"'firiet'j..q~estlon'may
    be stated as follows:
    to,subjeot the defendant to~.suchterms ,and
    'ccdn'd~tiona~sas'~he~
    cotit may deem proper to
    with its ‘order@a$ in
    ~aiih.i``~cc&i@f.afio'e
    ‘,.
    ~.
    ~.partloul'arr~  Y.    ~'.'              8
    .". . ),'-
    -3078-
    .   ,
    Hon. Don Nugent. page 2 (C-634)
    vlola;~c;n,       Tyz$;h        t”; ‘``;~d;=&$-;;ll
    Y
    extent as is provided by law for contempt of
    the court In any other suit or proceeding
    cognizable by the court." (Emphasis supplikd)
    The above quoted portion of Article 2328b-4 reveals
    that the Legislature did not contemplate that a second petl-
    tlon from the 'lnltiatlng state would be necessary In order
    for the Texas court ,to enforce Its order by contempt pro-
    ceedings.
    Your remaining questions are set out In the body of
    your request as Sbllows:
    "II. The new law suggested perhaps
    that before a criminal complaint is fll.ed
    and extradition a.ppliedfor that there
    should have been resort to the civil por-
    tion of thlB act at least ninety days be-
    fore the criminal action is initiated.
    "1. My question is should we as a
    matttirof form resort to the civil action
    first, then wait ninety days before filing
    the criminal complaint and asking for extra-
    dition?
    My next question 1s FS, In fact,
    ‘l.2.
    we make application for extradition wl.thout
    the prior civil action being Inaugurated
    and the extradition papers are approved and
    signed by the Governor, Is It safe to as-
    sume that the ninety day compliance will not
    be required?
    There is no ninety day period mentioned In Article
    2328b-4 in the connection which you Buggest. However,
    Section 5 of Article 2328b-4 does allow the Governor to
    seek extradition to enforce support pa ents due Texas resl-
    denta, and Section 6 of Article 2328b-r provides as follows:
    "sec. 6. (a) Before making the demand
    on the Governoi.of any other state for the
    surrender of a person charged In this State
    with the crime of falling to provide for the
    support of any person, the Governotiof thls
    State may require any prosecuting attorney
    of this State to satisfy him that at least
    -3079-
    Ron. Don Nugent, page 3   (c-634)
    sixty (60) days prior thereto the obligee
    brought an action Sdr'the support under this
    Act, or that the bringing of an action would
    be of no avail.
    '(b) When under this or a substantially
    similar Act, a~demand Is made upon the Governor
    of this State by the~Governor of another state
    for the surrender of a person charged in the
    other 8tat.ewl.ththe crime of falling to bro-
    vlde support, the Governor may call upon any
    prosecuting attorney to Investigate or assist
    in Investigating the demand, and to report to
    him whether any action for support has been
    brought under this Act or would be effective.
    "(c) IS any action for the support would
    be effective and no action has been brought, the
    Governor may delay honoring the demand for a
    reasonable time to permit prosecution of an
    action for support.
    "(d) If an actionsfor support has been
    brought and the person demanded has prevailed
    in that action, the Governor may decline to
    honor the demand.
    "(e) If an action for support has been
    brought and pursuant thereto the person deman-
    ded Is subject to a support order, the Governor
    may decline to honor the demand 80 longas the
    person demanded,ls ~complylng with the support
    order."
    Criminal and extradition proceedings proved highly
    unsatisfactory as a method of enforcing child support against
    a defendant who crossed state lines; hence the enactment of
    the uniform reciprocal enforcement of support legislation by
    the states. It was primarily for this reason that the National
    Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws and the
    American Bar Association recommended to the states the adoption
    of said Act. Commissioners' Prefatory Note to the Uniform
    Reciprocal Enforcement of Su port Act, Handbook of Commissioners
    :on Uniform State Laws, (19507, page 171. The purpose of
    Article 232tlb-4and analogous legislation adopted by other
    states, as shown by the Commissioner's Prefatory Note to the
    Model 
    Act, supra
    , was not to punish a defendant, but to force
    him to meet his legal obligations to support his dependants.
    Jailing the Defendant or extraditing him does not directly
    -3080-
    Hon. Don Nugent, page 4~ (C-634)
    serve the purpose of supporting the dependants or of relieving
    the states from a burden on their welfare rolls. Therefore,
    the criminal sections of Article 23?8b-4'were Intended only to
    be used If the bringing of a o1vll action would be of no avail,
    or after civil action has felled to produce results.
    It Is our opinion that, In most Instances, It would be
    advisable to bring a civll'actlon before crlmlnal extradition
    proceedings are brought - not as a matter of form, but because
    by a civil proceeding the purpose of Article 2328b-4 18 more
    directly served.
    The Governor In his discretion need not reaulre prior
    resort to the civil courts as a condition precedent to his
    honoring the demand for extradition. However, If a civil action
    Is not brought you may not safely assume'that extradition will
    be honored, since the Governor of a responding state, acting
    under legislative enactments similar to Article 2328b-4
    may require an attempt to be made tc secure relief through a
    civil action before he will honor the demand for extradition.
    SUMMARY
    1.   Having entered an order under Article
    2328b-4, V.C.S., aga1nst.a looal resi-
    dent to enforce a support order of an
    out-of-state court, the T!eXaS Court
    may.enSorce that order - through con-
    tempt proceedings if necessary - on its
    own motion and without a new complaint
    being filed by the initiating state.
    2.   Smooth processing of an action upon
    extradition papers filed under Artlole
    2328b-4, V.C.S.,,can best be obtained
    if a bona fide attempt to collect back
    payments by civil process under the
    olvll sections of Article 2328b-4 has
    proceeded the filing of extradition
    papers by a period of at least sixty
    days.
    Very truly yours,
    WAGGCNFR CARR
    Attorney General of Texas
    -3081-
    Ron. Bon Nugent, page 5   (C-634)
    B
    orney General
    LJC:om
    APPROVED:
    OPINION COMMITTEE
    W. V. Geppert, Chairman
    Sam Kelley
    Douglas Chllton
    JohnBanks
    Charles Bardwell
    APPROVED FOR THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
    By: T. B. Wright
    -308%
    

Document Info

Docket Number: C-634

Judges: Waggoner Carr

Filed Date: 7/2/1966

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 2/18/2017