Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion ( 1944 )

.
. .
1
478
OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS
AUSTIN
Honorablr ‘B. ‘I, Cunningham
county Auditor
19avarr0, county
Corrloaaa, Toxaa
Doar Sir:
dare8 wore
Your rroeat rrqur ion ot thlv depart-
ment upon the queotlou aa h has bem raoeiosd.
btghwapr sad taken
e oomplalntr oi
ragranoy ar he Justioe o? the
trenraoth. Ho
in oonnaotlon wlth the original
we hare bwn u.u&li to find any oourt d~oialopiOOII-
rtrulng-Artiolr 1065 Cow. C. P. rolatira to SOUP quaatlan.
Howetar, it 1a our opinion that if the otfloer had a warrant
for thr arrest of the poraon charged with taglranoy when ho
Honorable B. I. Cunningham, page 2
arrested him, ha would ba legally entitled to hi8 mileage
feea for the.airaber of all.8 neoe88arll.yand aotuelly trarrl-
ed in oonnrotlon with this original arrant. Seld peaor
offloor would not be mtltled to mileage ieor ln laoh of
the 18 ueem but 0~11 a8 to cme oasa. OII the other hand
if he had no warrent for his arrest, ha 18 not entitled &
either en urerb tar or mlleaqr broaueo &he ure8t would be
illsgaL The rtatutrr do not ermh a praor ofilorr to make
an arrert, undu the faotr rta t ld without a warrant.
our oplElon am to mllea 18 bared the oonetruotion
o? Artlole 1122 of the Code of Crfslnal Prooadure, a8 amended
in 1923 mileage fee8 bring id by the etate, wherein the
oour0 (in Blngham t. State r 7) 8, Qf. 147 rwrrrsd OB ground
that appeal not proper rem:dy, 280 9. We 1062) said:
(1 the leaner le the unit in oomputing
the em&*of ni r oage due and not the number of
6amar The Legielaturr iatendrd to allow . . .
allsaga of 10 aentr only for oomeylng a prisoner
after arrrrt without ieprd to the number of
oaaea agains& him . . .*
o inion HO. 0-3062 also answers t&lo mileage ques-
tion and aa E8 out the propor prooedwe that we beliers should
be followed. we enolo8e a oopp for your oontsnlenoe.
As to the question as to the legal right to oharge
arrest tear in eaoh sass, we oall your attantlon to Artlole 1011
Cow. c. P.‘, whlah reads as follows!
qo item OS aoste shall be ,tarer for a purported
srnios whtoh was not D@fOrmOd, or ror a rrrtlor tar
which no fer ir lxprrarly pzotfded by law.* (EWha#l#
-8)
A8 stated in yourlstter the defendant wq8 arrrsted
but the one time) therefore, only one arre8t Ssr oould be
OharLed in all the 18 dama, ?+t in thlr oonneotloa we Oall
OW attsntlon to Opinion Ho. 04160 In whloh thle department
ii eld that the officer relaasing the defendant from thr eereral
Judgments would be entitled to a release fee in eaoh o-me*
480
Honorable I!. Y. Cunnlngharn, pam 3
~u$$ing that th6 ?OX%&dng?d? ~ewerr Your
inquiry, we am
fou$8 very brulY