Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion ( 1958 )

r
ORNEY GENERAL
0 P?=XAS
October 24, 1958
Mr. 0. B. Ellis, Director
Texas Department of Corrections
Huntsville, Texas
Opinion No. ww-518
Re: Computation of time to be
credited on the term of a
prisoner while he is con-
fined In a State mental
Dear Mr. Ellis: hospital.
Your request for an opinion cqncerns the question of
whether the provisions of House Bill 906, 55th Legislature,
Regular Session, 1957, which repeals all existing statutes
and makes provisions for prisoners to receive credit for t.ime
while Inmental institutionsJ be retroactive In the case of a
prisoner who was in Rusk State Mental Hospital at the time the
Bill was passed.
Section 17 of House Bill 906, 55th Leglslature,Regular
Session, 1957, chapter 486, at page 1416, also Article 932b
of Vernon's Annotated Code of Criminal Procedure,,provides:
"The time a prisoner is confined in a
State mental hospital for treatment shall be
considered time served and shall be credited
to the term of his sentence, but he shall not
be entitled to any commutation of sentence for
good conduct while he is under treatment in a
mental hospital."
The effective date of this statute was January 1, 1958.
In our Opinion No, O-5721, addressed to the Texas
Prison System, Bureau of Records and Identification, Hunts-
ville, Texas, we passed upon the question whether inmates
of the Texas Prison System who may at various times be ad-
julged insane and committed to State institutions for the
insane are entitled to the benefits of the commutation of
time as prescribed by law.
In answering that question, we said:
Mr. 0. B. Ellis, page 2 (W-518 )
"We are of the opinion thatthe
foregoing discussion dislcoses a legis-
lative policy In Texas of not subjecting
insane persons to criminal punishment and
that the time spent by an insane In a
state hospital should not be counted on
his sentence as a criminal."
This opinion was based primarily on the following
authorities:
Article 2 of the Penal,Code provides:
"The object of punishment is to
supress crime and reform the offender."
Article 34 of the Penal Code in part reads:
11
No person who becomes insane
after he is'found guilty shall be punished
while In such condition."
Articles 925 and 928 of Vernon's Code of Criminal
Procedure respectively provide:
"Upon the trial of an issue of
insanity, if the defendant is found to
be insane, all further proceedings in the
case against him shall be suspended until
he becomes sane."
"If the defendant becomessane, he
shall be brought before the court In which
he was convlkted or before the District Court
In the County in which the defendant is located
at the time he is alleged to have become sane;
and, a jury shall be impaneled in the Court be-
fore which such defendant is brought to try the
issue of his sanity; and, if he is found to be
sane, the conviction shall be enforced against
him as if the proceedings had never been suspended."
Also see Article 6184 L, Vernon's Civil Statutes, which
provides for allowing convicts overtime for good conduct.
Section 16 of Article I of the Texas Constitution pro-
vides:
c -
XI-. 0. B. Ellis, page 3 (``-518)
“ib bili of attainder. ex nest
facto law, retroactive law-or any law
impairing the obligation of contracts
shall be made.!' (lkphasis added.)
In 39 Texas Jurisprudence, page 54, we find the follovr-
ing language:
11
. . t A statute will not be
applied or construed retrospedtively or
given retroactive operation, so as to
affect existing rights or create new
obligations and impose new duties as to
past transactiors,unless It clearly
appears, from its terms or at least by
fair implication, that the Legislature
so intended. On the contrary, a statute
is generally held to operate prospectively
unless a contrary construction is required
by the terms or the nature and object of
i-.!l
e law . It is always presumed that a
;statute, not relating merely to remedies
and modes of procedure, is intended to
operate prospectively, and all doubts
are resolved in favor of such construction."
(Giting City of ,Ft. Worth v. Morrow, 284
,; . Y . 275 .
_,
L ; ic our opinion after examining Rouse Bill 906,
7 .::$.:::!n 'i!...
7('C) Regular Session, 1957, that the Legislature
,'~: :I
~.,i-,-,t intend either clearly or by fair implication to make
..,LL.yc ;t,-.t-utc retroactive in operation. Even if the statute
:!::: rC?;;x::ct4vein operation the retroactive part would be voi,, '3
:>) ,-;,,-,
1;.
cj :I.,y]:j,chplaces all matters of clemency, reprieves,
.:ol.:1,:1~::-11t:i.(:!:::
and pardons, 1.1~ the Governor. (See Ex Parte
;,;~Y~;~is:lo:,, 152 s.:!. 2nd 289; Gilderbloom v. State, 272 S.W. 2nd
?' )t is our opinion that the time spend by prisoners who
i.;``‘~: :iLn ; state mental hospj.tal prior to January 1, 1958, does
;~!,'I<:(>i?i;;C LX&X- Section 17 of House Bill 906, 55th Legislature,
:y~.``:.y;>.- :~egs:uon,1957; that the time spent by prisoners after
,T~Y.yJlJ~-q? 1~, rgqj, in such state mentz.1 hospitals would come under
;:?oction3.7of- House Bill 906, 55th Legislature, Regular Session,
1?_;7.
Mr. 0. B. Ellis, page 4. mw-518)
SUMMARY
Section 17 of House Bill 906, 55th
Legislature, Regular Session, 1957,
is not a retroactive statute which
would give prisoners credit for
time spent while under treatment in
a state mental hospital prior to
January 1, 1958.
Yours very truly,
WILL WILSON
Attorney General of Texas
LEP:mfh Assistant
APPROVED:
OPINION COMMITTEE
Geo. P. Blackburn, Chairman
J. Milton Ri~chardson
Jack Goodman
Wm. R Hemphill
Dean Davis
Morgan Nesbitt
R$?IEW$DVFCRTgr,TTORNEY GENERAL
: . .