Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion ( 1988 )


Menu:
  •                      IQ&I 31, 1988
    Honorable Mike Driscoll        Opinion No. JR-880
    Harris County Attorney
    1001 Preston, Suite 634        Re: Authority   of a commis-
    Houston, Texas 77002           sioners court to set fees
    for the execution of criminal
    warrants  by a    sheriff  or
    constable  (RQ-1060)
    Dear Mr. Driscoll:
    You have requested an opinion from this office on the
    following question:
    May commissioners courts set fees for the
    execution of criminal warrants by the sheriff
    and constable?
    In 1981, the legislature    enacted article  3926a,
    V.T.C.S. (since codified as section 118.131 of the Local
    Government Code), reading:
    (a) The commissioners,   court of    each
    county may set reasonable fees to be charged
    for services by the offices of sheriffs  and
    constables.
    (b) A commissioners  court may not        set
    fees higher than is necessary to pay         the
    expenses of providing the services.
    Acts 1981, 67th Leg., ch. 379, 51, at 1001.
    Subsection 2(a) of the      bill that enacted article
    3926a contained the following    provision:  "Fees provided
    for sheriffs and constables in   other laws in conflict with
    the provisions of this Act are   repealed to the extent they
    conflict with this Act." 
    Id. at 52.
    But the bill also
    stated, in section 3(b):
    Until a commissioners  court prescribes
    different fees pursuant to Article   3926a,
    Revised Civil Statutes of Texas, 1925, the
    p. 4296
    Honorable Mike Driscoll - Page 2    (Jh-880)
    ?
    fees charged by a sheriff or constable   are
    those provided   by the law in effect on
    August 31, 1981. Fees charged by a sheriff              -.
    or constable for   services performed before
    the effective date of this Act are governed
    by the law in effect at the time the
    services were performed.
    Therefore, by the express terms of the bill enacting
    article   3926a, if laws governing    the   collection   of
    sheriff's fees in criminal cases were in conflict with the
    new law, they were repealed to the extent of the conflict,
    but onlv Insofar as a oarticular      commissioners   court
    prescribed different fees. They were to remain in effect
    in those counties where no different fees were prescribed.
    At the time article     3926a was enacted,    articles
    53.01, 53.02 and 53.04 of the Code of Criminal Procedure
    specified particular   charges  (applicable throughout   the
    state) to be made for services performed by peace officers
    in misdemeanor   cases. '~In 1985, the legislature     first
    amended article 53.01, m    Acts 1985, 69th Leg., ch. 239,
    99, at 1183, and then, in a Wonsubstantive       revision,"
    relocated the substance of articles 53.01 and 53.04 (prior
    to amendment)  to chapter 102 of the Code of Criminal
    Procedure as article   102.001 without expressly  repealin
    the two articles   from which the provisions were taken. 9
    m   Acts 1985, 69th Leg., ch. 269 at 1300. Articles 53.01
    and 53.04 were eventually repealed in 1987 by the act that
    conformed article 102.001 to the previous 1985 amendments.
    @.g Acts 1987, 70th Leg., ch. 167, 54.01(b), at 2647.
    In 1987, as part of a nonsubstantive recodification,
    article 3926a was incorporated into the Local Government
    Code as section 118.131 thereof with no significant change
    in language. m    Acts 1987, 70th Leg., ch.   149, at 1397,
    1699, 2548. The same legislature had previously amended
    article 3926a. m    Acts 1987, 70th Leg., ch. 143, at 640.
    Although the earlier changes were not expressly     carried
    forward by the nonsubstantive   revision that transferred
    the statute to the Local Government Code, they are to be
    read as a part of the encoded provision.    See Gov't Code
    1. Article 53.02 of the Code of Criminal Procedure
    was repealed by the 69th Legislature.   Acts 1985, 69th
    Leg., ch. 269, 55, at 1307.
    p. 4297
    Honorable Mike Driscoll - Page 3 (-880)
    §311.031(c) (repeal of article by code does not affect
    amendment of the article by the same legislature). None
    of these changes affect our answer.
    In order to answer your question, we need not deter-
    mine the relationship  between the general provisions    of
    the 1981 law giving power to commissioners courts (former
    article 3926a, V.T.C.S., now section 118.131 of the Local
    Government Code) and the specific provisions (now found in
    article 102.001) of the Code of Criminal    Procedure which
    were in force at the time former article         3926a was
    enacted. We need not do so because we have concluded that
    the provisions now found in section 118.131 of the Local
    Government Code cannot constitutionally     reach fees of
    sheriffs or constables  assessed as costs in misdemeanor
    criminal cases.
    In Texas, costs in misdemeanor    criminal cases are
    assessed as part of the punishment.   J& carte Carson, 
    159 S.W.2d 126
    (Tex. Crim. App.~ 1942): Ex carte Mann, 
    46 S.W. 828
    (Tex. Crim. App. 1898). See also Attorney        General
    Opinion JM-443 (1986). a      United States v. Palmer, 
    809 F.2d 1504
    (11th Cir. 1987) (holding imposition of costs as
    P   punishment   to   be constitutional).     A law    allowing
    different costs to be assessed in different    counties for
    the same penal offense would have the effect of allowing
    the penalty for state-defined   crimes to vary from county
    to county and would violate both "due process@B and "equal
    protectionl' constitutional   rights.   U.S.   Const.,   5th
    Amend., 14th Amend.: Tex. Const., art. I 553, 19; Ex oarte
    !Z;son, sunrg. See Memet v. State 
    642 S.W.2d 518
    (Tex.
    . - Houston [14th Dist.] 1982, bet. ref'd).    S    also
    132 S.W.Zd 408 (Tex. Crim. App.eT939);
    W#               e, 
    8 S.W.2d 134
    (Tex. Crim. App. 1928).
    If we could reasonably construe article 3926a and its
    later expression, section 118.131 of the Local Government
    Code, as not intended to embrace criminal matters,       we
    would do so in order to avoid suggesting        unconstitu-
    tionality, but there is nothing on the face of either of
    them. to indicate that the scope was intended to be
    anything   less than all-embracing.     Article  3926a was
    couched in language that would normally be considered
    inclusive of all Hservices by the offices of sheriffs and
    constables," and, although its application to fees charged
    in criminal cases was not discussed, it was so considered
    in Attorney General Opinion JM-193    (1984). Nothing   now
    found in section    118;131 of the Local Government    Code
    would alter that view. The retention of articles      53.01
    p. 4298
    Honorable Mike Driscoll - Page 4 (JM-88.0)
    -.
    and 53.04 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (and the later
    incorporation of article   102.001 in Title    2 thereof)
    respecting such fees indicates no intention to limit the
    eventual scope of article 3926a or section 118.131 because
    such statutes,  if "in conflict" with article 3926a     (01
    section 118.131), were intended ~to have continuing effect
    only where a commissioners     court failed   to use its
    "article 3926a" powers. Such statutes were intended to be
    of no effect in counties fully employing such authority.
    A different argument about its intended    scope could
    be made, perhaps,  if the legislative history of article
    3926a (or its successor) suggested   a legislative   intent
    that the statute apply only to civil proceedings, but the
    available legislative history shows affirmatively   that it
    was &ended   to embrace fees in criminal proceedings     as
    well as in civil proceedings.  The Bill Analysis regarding
    House Bill No. 1617 (the 1981 bill enacting former article
    3926a), prepared for the House Committee on Security and
    Sanctions of the 67th Legislature, states:
    BACKGROUND:
    At present,    the legislature  sets the fees
    charged
    . .     for   the  delivery  of   civil  and
    & papers by a sheriff or constable,
    and provides one cost for every county      in
    the state.     The legislature    also decides
    the merits    of such issues as 'attempted
    service. ) The commissioners    court of each
    county does not have the discretion         of
    setting m       fees, even though the cost of
    serving papers varies from county to county.
    This Bill would place the responsibility
    of setting  fees  charged by sheriffs     and
    constables under the local control of the
    various commissioners  courts.    These  fees
    would not be set higher than the actual cost
    of the services provided.   (Emphasis added.)
    a   Code Crim. Proc. art. 102.009 (formerly article 53.09)
    (criminal costs in class C misdemeanors    set by commis-
    sioners court in populous counties).
    We are compelled to conclude that article 3926a (now
    section 118.131) was intended, j&er alia, to control the
    p. 4299
    ,
    Honorable Mike Driscoll - Page 5 (X4-880)
    ,-
    setting of fees for sheriffs and constables in criminal
    proceedings, and that insofar as it or its successor
    attempts to do so, it is unconstitutional.    gx oarte
    Carson, i5i!&sa.
    However, a statute found to be unconstitutional      in
    part need not fall in its entirety if its provisions are
    not so connected in subject matter, so interdependent,
    or otherwise so bound together that it can be presumed
    the legislature would have passed the law devoid of its
    unconstitutional aspect.    $8.9 Countv  School Trustees   of
    Orana eCout    v.
    School District No. 8, 153 S.W.2ds434 (Tex. 1941). In its
    original configuration,   the 1981 bill enacting     article
    3926a reouired commissioners   courts to set sheriff's    and
    constable's fees. As the bill analysis     shows, however, a
    subcommittee amendment   changed the phrase,     "shall set
    reasonable fees,"    to read,  Iv= set    reasonable   fees."
    Bill Analysis     to H.B. No. 1617, prepared      for House
    Committee on Security and Sanctions,      67th Leg.   (1981).
    Thus, the legislature   did not command that commissioners
    courts set all fees for sheriffs and constables,          nor
    command that if any particular       fees were set by the
    commissioners court, all others also must be set by that
    body. It follows that the act was passed with the
    understanding (though not the expectation, perhaps)      that
    every county might decline to set such fees in criminal
    cases.
    In other words, the legislature exhibited     an intent
    to enact former article 3926a even if the statute were
    never to be applied to the fees of sheriffs and constables
    in criminal cases. The 1985 retention of the recodified
    provisions now found in article    102.001 of the Code of
    Criminal Procedure  showed a legislative willingness     and
    expectation that those provisions would apply where former
    article 3926a (for whatever reason) was not utilized.     We
    do not believe section 118.131, the successor       statute,
    must be declared unconstitutional in its entirety merely
    because its application   to fees in misdemeanor    criminal
    cases would unconstitutionally   violate *'due process"  and
    "equal rights" provisions.      Its application    to civil
    matters is unaffected.
    Inasmuch as section 118.131 may not be constitu-
    tionally read to allow commissioners   courts to set fees
    for the execution   of criminal warrants   in misdemeanor
    cases by the sheriff or constable,  any potential conflict
    that would have otherwise existed between  section 118.131
    p. 4300
    Honorable Mike Driscoll - Page 6    (JM-880)
    and statutes purporting to govern the fees of sheriffs and
    constables in such criminal    cases is eliminated,    The
    general repealer of Vonflicting   statutes"  found in the     --.
    bill that enacted former article 3926a will not apply,
    therefore, and the provisions of article 102.001 of the
    Code of Criminal  Procedure will control the fees to be
    charged in misdemeanor cases.
    We are aware that article 102.001 was amended in 1987
    to limit its applicability to counties with less than two
    million population, and that article 102.011 of the Code
    of Criminal   Procedure was enacted to specify different
    costs for larger counties. $&= Acts 1987, 70th Deg., ch.
    821, at 5695. For reasons already explained,       however,
    charges for the services of peace officers assessed      as
    costs in misdemeanor    criminal prosecutions   for state-
    defined offenses must be uniform throughout the state to
    escape condemnation on constitutional grounds.     Inasmuch
    as the only purpose of the 1987 act was to accomplish an
    unconstitutional objective, i.e., to specify~ different
    cost charges    in   misdemeanor criminal    cases to    be
    applicable for the same state-defined offense in different
    counties, depending   on population,  it cannot be given
    effect, and article    102.001 remains applicable   in all
    counties.
    Your request   for an opinion, we realize,   is not
    limited to misdemeanor  situations.  It asks about "fees
    for the execution of criminal warrants," not merely about
    fees in misdemeanor cases.
    Although the result   is the same, the analysis with
    respect to sheriff's and constable's fees in felony cases
    is somewhat different.   Former Code of Criminal Procedure
    articles 1018, 1029, and 1030 governed      fees in felony
    cases, but were expressly repealed pro forma by the "non-
    substantive"   1985 act that rearranged     the provisions
    previously found in articles   53.01 and 53.04 of the Code
    of Criminal Procedure.   See Acts 1985, 69th Deg., ch. 269,
    at 1300, 1307.
    In felony cases,  fees and costs were formerly paid
    initially by the state pursuant to articles 1029 and 1030,
    but article 1018 of the code made their reuavment a charge
    against convicted  defendants.   (Articles 1029 and 1030      I
    imposed different  fees for sheriffs and constables     in
    felony cases, depending on (1) the number of votes cast in
    presidential elections in the county and ('2) the popula-
    tion of the county.)   However, such repayments  have been
    p. 4301
    Honorable Mike Driscoll - Page 7 (JM-880)
    :-
    unnecessary  since 1949,    when it became   statutorily
    forbidden for the state or a county to pay a fee to an
    officer compensated  on a salary basis.  .&=Acts   1949,
    51st Leg., ch. 257, 51, at 474.
    Despite a design to operate in a way declared above
    to be unconstitutional for OOegual protection" and "due
    process'* reasons in misdemeanor cases, these   "felony" fee
    statutes were never in nari materia with article 3926a or
    section 118.131.    They ware   rendered inoperative   by a
    statute enacted before   former article  3926a became   law.
    The revisor's note discussing the repeal of articles 1029,
    1030, and 1018 by the 1985 %onsubstantive"      revisory act
    is found following article 104.002 of the Code of Criminal
    Procedure.   It explains how the former Code of Criminal
    Procedure   statutes were rendered    inapplicable   by the
    adoption   of article XVI, section 61,        of the Texas
    Constitution abolishing the "fee system"   for compensatin
    officers, and by the enactment of former article 3912e, ?
    V.T.C.S., forbidding payment by the state of fees to local
    officers (both of which occurred prior to the enactment in
    1981 of former article 3926a):
    Article 3912e [section 31 expressly    states
    that neither the state nor a county may pay
    a fee or commission to a district or county
    officer compensated    on a salary     basis.
    Article  XVI, section    61 of   the    Texas
    Constitution   requires . . . sheriffs    and
    constables to be paid on a salary basis.
    Since all officers . . . are or habited from
    receivina fees from the state. Ehe nrovision
    of article   1018 reouj&.na  that the fees
    paid bv the state are a harae aaai        th
    defendant are meaninalessc (Smphasi?a~ded.~
    We therefore advise that commissioners courts may not
    set fees for the execution   of criminal warrants by the
    sheriff or constable   in either misdemeanor    or felony
    2. Article 3912e was repealed by Acts 1987, 70th
    Legislature, chapter 149, section 49(l) and recodified as
    part of the Local Government Code, principally at chapter
    154. The prohibition     against paying fees to salaried
    officers is now codified   at section 154.002 of the Local
    Government Code.
    p. 4302
    Honorable Mike Driscoll - Page 8     (JM-880)
    cases. To the extent that Attorney General Opinion JM-193
    (1984) suggests otherwise, it should not be followed.
    SUMMARY
    Commissioners courts may not set fees
    for the execution of criminal warrants   by
    the sheriff or constable    in either mis-
    demeanor or felony cases.     Such fees in
    misdemeanor. cases involving state criminal
    statutes must be uniform     statewide, and
    such fees in felony cases are no longer
    collected.
    Iv-2j~y&
    JIM     MATTOX
    Attorney General of Texas
    MARYEELLER
    First Assistant Attorney General
    mu MCCREARY
    Executive Assistant Attorney General
    JUDGE ZOLLIE STEAELEY
    Special Assistant Attorney General
    RICK GILPIN
    Chairman, Opinion Committee
    Prepared by Bruce Youngblood
    Assistant Attorney General
    p. 4303
    

Document Info

Docket Number: JM-880

Judges: Jim Mattox

Filed Date: 7/2/1988

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 2/18/2017