Judges: JOHN ASHCROFT
Filed Date: 1/14/1982
Status: Precedential
Modified Date: 7/5/2016
Dear Mr. Daniel:
This is in response to your question,
When a city police officer writes a ticket within his jurisdiction he has the option to charge the person with a state criminal charge or a city municipal [sic] charge. If he writes a state criminal charge, the person appears in the Associated [sic] Circuit Court. If he writes a municipal charge, the person appears in a municipal court. If the training funds generated as described in
590.140 RSMo. are a result of criminal charges levied by a city police officer can those funds be used to train city police officers or are the funds solely to be used for county officers?
You have informed us that some county officials are interested in using excess amounts in these county funds to train city police officers, and have asked if such an expenditure is authorized by Chapter 590, RSMo. After a careful examination of Chapter 590, we conclude that county training funds generated as described in Section
The primary rule in determining the intent of the General Assembly is to give the words used in the statute their plain and ordinary meaning. City of Willow Springs v. Missouri StateLibrarian,
Section
1. A fee of up to two dollars may be assessed as costs in each court proceeding filed in any court in the state for violations of the general criminal laws of the state, including infractions, or violations of county or municipal ordinances, provided that no such fee shall be collected for non-moving traffic violations, and no such fee shall be collected for violations of fish and game regulations, and no such fee shall be collected in any proceeding in any court when the proceeding or defendant has been dismissed by the court. For violations of the general criminal laws of the state or county ordinances, no such fee shall be collected unless it is authorized by the county government where the violation occurred. For violations of municipal ordinances, no such fee shall be collected unless it is authorized by the municipal government where the violation occurred. Such fees shall be collected by the official of each respective court responsible for collecting court costs and fines and shall be transmitted monthly to the treasurer of the county where the violation occurred in the case of violations of the general criminal laws of the state or county ordinances and to the treasurer of the municipality where the violation occurred in the case of violations of municipal ordinances.
2. Each county and municipality may use funds received under this section only to pay for the training required as provided in section
590.100 to590.150 , provided that any excess funds not needed to pay for such training may be used to pay for additional training for peace officers or for training for other law enforcement officers employed or appointed by the county or municipality. [Emphasis added.]
Section
Any person who is employed or appointed as a peace officer after December 31, 1978, shall be employed or appointed on a temporary and probationary basis, and the hiring agency shall, within one year after the employee has assumed his office, take all necessary steps to qualify the employee for certification by the director. [Emphasis added.]
Thus, the responsibility for providing probationary peace officers with training falls on the agency which hired the officer.
The director of the Department of Public Safety may certify a peace officer only after the training standards established under Sections
Section
Section
In our Opinion Letter No. 32, Daniel, 1981, we stated that:
[E]ach county and municipality may use any excess funds not needed to pay for the minimum mandatory training for such additional training as it sees fit. This is in keeping with subsection 2 of §
590.105 , RSMo 1978, which authorizes peace officers within this state to adopt standards which are higher than the minimum standards set forth by the director of the Department of Public Safety. . . . [T]he Director has no responsibility with respect to the excess funds or the type of training received therewith. [Emphasis added.]
We believe that the "additional training" for which the first option under Section
The second permitted use of excess funds under Section
Our holding is consistent with the general scheme of Sections
We add a caveat. Our opinion herein is limited to holding that county funds may not be used to pay for training for municipal police officers. We do not intend to discourage joint cooperation between the various law enforcement agencies in this state for training purposes.
CONCLUSION
It is, therefore, the opinion of this office that county funds generated by the collection of fees for violations of the general criminal laws of the state, pursuant to Section
This opinion, which I hereby approve, was prepared by my assistant, Charles R. Miller.
Very truly yours,
JOHN ASHCROFT Attorney General