OFFlCE OF THE **A ’** **CTORNEY GENERAL**  **OF T**  **AUSTIN QRlu,**  **G** **M*nw** ***-WV 0mm-b** 

HonorableWalter C. Strong,Member Board of l'ardone

and Paroles Auutln, Texas
Dear Sir: Opinion lh 0-3648-A Rer Interpretation oi OIW opzIl.ion

Ho* O-3648 .Thls vlll aalmovledgereoblpt of your letter oft septmlber5, 1941, lrhereirr you be&ae to Imov the **tsrpretation ot**  **that port**  **of OUT** **0pMon Ho.**  **O** roper lq- **,6d e-a+ns**  as **rouovclt** *As statedbefore, vhile the relatormap not 

### have forfeited

### the extra the 

### for good conduot an&~overtlam

vork elloved vlslch he bad earned up to hi8 relesre on the con&Stlozml pardon, he ir **not entitled**  **to receive**  

### a* **0 credit**  **on hi13**  **foia year**  **nentenae, the**  **one yeu,**  **one month**  **and rlx**  teen days that he van at large on the oondltioml pardan. The aame ,Ungth of &me remained to be servedby r4ator aP”Sune 20, 194-0, 

### a8 on Hay 4, 1939."
In said opinionve ptmred on tvo po%nts. The quoted portion, net out 

### hereinabove, et&e8 both of the tvo points ruled on by said ogInlon. The fir& point le summarizedin the firet four linee, reading aa follovet

“As **abated** before, vhlle the relatormay not have forfeitedthe extra time 

### ‘ior good oQndu0t and overtlmeVOrk 8Llovetl Huh he had 0arned 0
This first point, therefoxut, merely states that 

### under the f!otzi

submittedto uu in the Virgil Bounda oases vhloh are set out fn asid opinS011, the petite&la Fzr

authorities

did not have the right, at the ttie the relator Vlrgll Bounds) ~8 re**turned** to the penitentiary,to forfeit any of the ~overtlme and 

### 224

### 225

%encmableWalter 0. Stmmg, Page 2

mamutation earned by sald Virgil Bound8 prior to his dlsahmge en the eondltlonal pardon. our rea8ons for 80 hol&lg on that part of our opfnion,are fully set out on Pageltq themiddle of Page 0 of raid opinion.

The rreoond

point ruled on by ua in Bald opMon Is l s m ar l r ed

in the last rixlbr 

### of the qvotodportion, xwadlag ae rollov8rí l l l he ( r e l at o r , Vi r gil B0u p u. a) 10

### not o ntitled to noelve aa a aradlt aa hla four-yew l nt o n o e,

t he o n e ye ar , o n e m o nt h uul d8tean

U ay a t hat h8vao atl aq t ao nt he ao nUlti m al Bar Uun. PhcruEe1ar@.h0stirw n m all mu t o bel

er veu by r el at or



### 6 Vi r g il

Bo um b)

o n Jun e

20, 19 00 , a8 c m I 4 4,159.
It l ppoar8 fram your l*ttor that thb reoend point le the part vhlch you Uealre to have iaterpnteU.

aandltic&mrdon, aouldnetba aredltedanhim Sow-maw mmT~~II8eocmU

potit ir oovemd irr our OWdon to. %40, bpla vith the mIdtIleof Page 0 throughPakte 10 o? wld
IndeteminlagthequortionoSubtherVlWXlWuud8 mmldbe efitltleclto armlltonhir four-nap eentenoe of the ~y~,aaeBlonthanda~tcHn~~h,epentatl~eaahis of the oroclamaam uet nnule entit1L to of the time he spent out*l&Honorable**Walter** 0, Strong, **Page** 3

Whether to give him credit or not, vas a matter to be detezlrPined

by the Qavernor

, dn, the recaanenuation and advice of the Board of Pardons and Paroles. whether he is entitled to be **glvcn** credit, thmefom, must be detemtlued fxm the languageused in sold ~roolssintion.
merely 32558, !zn

our oplnlonHO. a-yM3, on t&l& seoon&pdnt, lie held that fran the 1-e used in Proolaatloa. So.
~&I Ilo.

granting said Virgil BOW&I said oondltlonal paMan, 1603, revoking said ~bnditlonal pardon, and fmm the other facts furnishedus, all of whloh are quoted in said opLaIon, lt Is shown that one o$ the oondltlonsuuderrrbLahsueh pardon vas granted, ira8. that n iii?

VIZ?fl Bout& violate say of the other aondltlons u&E vhiah Ls pa+doa vas grmated (suah as totally abstaix&lngfrm the use 6f intoxicratlng 111quors),

the pa&on amild be revoked and “the uid YisgU Bounds may be, by order of the Governor,retumed to @ oomf3ned in the penltsn'tlary until the end of his seateaee,daad t&t, therefore,the one year, one month aad sirteenday-61 oou3d not be oreditedon his eentenoe,but that he had to serve the ~elen&thoftlset~trsayrln~unserr~~hta four-ye& sentems w he n he l aasptedl

the pardon uat

these dendltions, on Hay 4, 1939.

Under the facts upoarhleh said opti&m 1e based, ve determinedthat Virgil Bounds **vas** grants a pardoa br the Oovernor--subject

to **eertaln** cenbitlims,or **strlaga,** attached; In other vcrdp, that he vba granted **a** fom of exooutlveoLarenog commonly 'knowi as a co*tlonal parden,'by. **authoeity of**  Artlale 4, Bcotlon 11, Constitutionof Texas, wd;badoptedlkwez4bor 3, 1955. Bounde accepted the pardon on the furthar oonditian’ that shouldbe violate any of the ather coaditlonsirpposed,~ he could be returned to the penltshtlarysnd oonfined In the penitentiary--for

how lox@ Fhe pracl~etlon etates %ntll the end of his zmntsnce."

The foctu upon vhlch said oplnlon Is based, further show that ‘theOovernor,b$ Proclamation fo.,l603,dated Jkme 20, 194C, revoked said oondltlonal pardon bemuse of the vlolation of the conditions upan vhlah It vas ~ran%ed. The revoaatlm also directs thatr “thfs prfson authorities w8BonorableWalter C. Strong, Page 4

hereby directed to take him in Charge and return him to the penltentlaryto serve the remainderof his sentence.”

By “remainderof his sentence”Is necessarily meant, the remcinder of his origins1 sentence,5s that la the only sentencehe vas undes, as far as the said Proalamations are concerned,

As stated at Page 8 of eeld opinion, “wherea prlroner has accepted e conditional pardon and has been released from imprisonment

by virtue thereof,but has violated or failed to perform the 0ondl.tl.r@s, or any of them, the pardon beccws void, and the oxUaina1 th **be rearrested**  and oanpelled -ergo the @unishme?l~~$~~~~ his or&l&l sentence,or so much thereof as he had not sufferedat the time of his releases and the time during vhloh the convict 5s at large under a conditional

pardon 1s not to be oonsideredas time served on the orlglnal sentence.”

As hereinabove shovn, the proolamation granting said pardon to said Virgil Bounds, vaa expressly condltlonedthat the failure of Bounds to complywith the,00 I righi?o under uhlah It vas granted,would give the @overnor the revoke the pardon and order Bounds oonflned ln the penitentiary until the end of his aenteme. The substanceof the languageused in said proclamation,**clearly** show that "until the end of thm sentenoe*meansZ;hetime wining to the end ofhls four-year sentence,~oalculated from the time of Bounds’ acceptanceof the condltlonal

pardon. If the Covernor,upon the recommendation of the E&and ’ of pardons b;Paroles,had Intended that the time during whloh Bounds vas out on Ns conditional pardon should be oredited on his four-year sentence, it is obvious that such Intention vould have been expressed ln clear language In the proclamation and not left to be implied from language,vhi h YO think clear1 &%~$%$p%~~ ~ee~e~~n~‘Ptb~~b~~~~~~~ts~~~ !ovemor In his proclmatlon till use that languagewhich vi11 most clearly shov his intention.

Since, therefore,the seoand point in said opinion (hcldlngdt~~under the language of the proclamationsIn his case, the other bacts submltted to ua 3.n his Case, he vas not entitled to receive as a credit on his four-year sentence the one year, one month and sixteen days he vas at largeHonorableWalter C. Strong, page 5

on his condItional pardon) is bssed on those specific facts In the Bounds ease snd the languageused in the proclsmatlons mentioned, It is obvious that sa1d.oplnion does not pass on hs general question of vhethrr ths time on an lrssate~s*entenoe ueases to run from the date he Is released from prison on clemency.

You ars thereforerespeotfklly advised that: First: Our OpinionAo. O-m8 does not hold and, therefore,~d not be oonatrued sa hold%& that ths time on an Inmate18 sentenoe oeaaes to run from the date ho Is released from prison on 01emena~. pn*t gQneral questicnYas not hr0m M.
It should furtherbe noted that the f8at8, as stated In aeid opinion, apeoltiaallyshov that the conditionsof the pardon vere vlolstedby Bounds rior to the exptiatlonof four E--F yeus frcsu

the date vhen he vaa sen enaed to serve a **four-year** term. Seoondt Said opinion **doea** not hold and, therefore,

nstrued as holdjmg or passIn&upan the quesshould not- tion of vhether & condItiona pcrrdoneo, whc viom his oonItlaald opinion,where Bounds violatedhis conditlonr before the eJcpIratIon of four **years** frcm the date he was sent-to a four-yearterm).

Since under the fae+s upon whloh our opinionHo. 0-3fiW Is based, the olemetiop granted to Bounds was a oondltional pardon (so rumed In the proolamatlon and so oonstrued by us from the language used in the proolasmtlon) granted under the authority aonferred by Artiole 4, Section 11 of the Constitutionof Texas, adopted lovember 3, 1.936, the elements of a statutoryparole are not lnvolv~d in arid opinion.

Third8 Said opinion, therefore,**does** not pass on, and aonseqmy should not be construedas passin(l on, theBnorable Walter 0. Strong, **Page** 6

fO&lOViag~quQSt~OMt (a) WhethQr the p8rOlQ StatutQSare **stfJ1 operative**  **in Texas,**  **a**lnoe the oreatlon of thQ presQnt Board of Pardons and Paroles under Artiole 4, Section 11 of the Constitutionof Texas, adoptedRovsmber 3, 1936. (bj The status of a prisonernow outside of t+ penitentiaryon a statutoryparole,

Trusting that the above fully answersyour iuqulry, ve are

**EPlef**