TEEA~~~ORNEY GENERAL 

OFTEXAS 

. 

HMorable T; 'Gilbert Adams 

C%init~ A$tdrneg 

J&isp&'County 

Jasper, Texas 

-.,~ 

Dear Sir: Oplniofi Non; o-52=- “‘~ 

Re: Authdrity.df a.Ju‘etibe bf3hV 

Pe&c'Ei to colIect“a‘fee-.id~'~he 

issuance of a search warrant. 

.., *. .~ __._ ~. 

Your request for ‘dpinion has beeti rec&iVed~ati~~bai+d 

-filly considered by this department. We quote from ycur request 

as follows: _^ 

"I would,thank you Fo furnish Bie with'an 

opinion as to what method and manner a Justice 

of the Ptiace" should.'fbllow intiollectlng fees f‘dr 

IsSuing a Search Warrant t5 Peace"Offlcers in liivestiga,tion of Liquor violations and other violaL 

tions which do not borne und.@r the jurisdiction bf 

the Justice Court, and in cases-~that do not come 

under the- jurisdiction upon trlCil,"of the Justice 

of the Peace; when the Bearch warrant Is used by 

the officer and no violation sufflc'iento prosecute, is found on the premises searched. . 

"Undbr Article 1066, Code bf Criminal Procedure, Texas Statutes, it reads as follows: 

"'Justices of the'peac.e shall receive the 

following fees in criminal actions tried before 

them. to be collected of the defendant in case of 

his condytion: 

. For each 1 . . . ..f . a .o 

"I,'po not find 

whereby a Justice of 

warrant, Seventy-five cents. 

any provision in the Statute 

thb Fe&e is..pr&ected in __ .- hlKfee .when he issues a S‘earch Warrant for the 

Peace Officer an&the violation, if one is found 

to'exlst, comes under the jurisdiction of the 

District Coiirt or the County Court, OP where it 

is found that there is not bufflclent vlolatioii 

to justify prosecution. I am referring especially 
., ., ,., 

Honorable T. Gilbert Adams, page 2 o-5286 

: ,, 

to violations of the Liquor Law and warrants issued by the Justice of the Peace for State Liquor 

Inspectors in their efforts to curb the violation 

of the Liquor law8 in a dry area. 

,"I Would assume that if there Wa8'.nOt suffitilefit @vld‘EhCe fbuduna to ijros&de.a violation upon 

which a Search wartiknt h&s iSSUd, there'would be 

no f&e payable to'the Justide of the"Peace, but in 

th& event ther'&.'is'~sufficibnt evidence'.found by .' 

reason"of the warrant, there Is some way to protec,t 

the Jtistice for his services in the issuing of 

the warrant." . 

-,' Article 1066, Revised Code of CVimlnal"-Proc,edure of 

Texas ,1925, referred,to~ifi your lette?,'was repelled in 1929"by 

H.B. 64 of the 41st Legislature Bf Texas, Firat Called Session. 

_. There is no Texas statute allowIng ju8tYkes'of the 

peace fees for issuing search warrants of any character. ." 

We quote from 34 Texas Jurisprudence, page 511, as 

fOllOW8: 

"As hereinbefore stated, the compensation of 

$ublic officers is fix& by the Constitution Sir 

statutes. An bfficer may not claim or reach aiiy 

%onSy without a law‘.authorizing him to do so, and 

clearly,,fixing the gmount to which he Is entitled. 

. . . . 

- In"vi,ew of the above it is our opinion that"justices 

of-'the peace are not i3ntftled to any fees for Issuing any 

character of search warrants. 

We enclose herewith for your information a copy of 

opinion'No. O-4091 of this department which holds Article 1071, 

Vernon's Annotated Texas Code of Criminal Procedure (an article 

allowing justices of"the petice examining tr'ial fees in misdemeanor cases to be tcixed against the defendant on conviction) 

to be unconstitutional. 
Honorable T. Gilbert Adams, page 3 o-5286 

Very truly yours 

ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS 

By s/Wm. J. F&nning 

Wm. J,“Fannlng 

Assistant 

WJF:mp:wc 

Encl. 

APPRm MAY 18, 1943 

s/Gerald C. Mann 

ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS 

Approved Opinion Committee By s/BIsB Chai'rman