The Attorney General of Texas 

December 31, 1982 

MARK WHITE 

Attorney General 

Supreme Court Building 

P. 0. Box 12548 

Austin, TX. 78711. 2548 

51214752501 

TAX 9101874.1387 

Tekwxier 5121475.0286 

1607 Main St., Suite 1400 

Dallas. TX. 75201.4709 

2141742.8944 

4824 Alberta Ave.. Suite 160 

El Paso, TX. 79905-2793 

9151533.3484 

1220 Dallas Ave., Suite 202 

Houston, TX. 770026986 

7131650-0666 

806 Broadway, Suite 312 

Lubbock, TX. 79401-3479 

8061747.5238 

4309 N. Tenth. Suite B 

MCAI~~, TX. 78501.1685 

5121882.4547 

200 Main Plaza, Suite 400 

San Antonio, TX. 76205-2797 

5121225-4191 

An Equal Opportunityl 

Affirmative Action Employer 

Honorable Tom Wells, III 

Lamar County Attorney 

Courthouse 

Paris, Texas 75460 

Opinion No. MW-587 

Re: Salary of Lamar County 

Juvenile Probation Officers 

Dear Mr. Wells: 

You have asked if the Lamar County Commissioners Court is 

required to approve the salary of the juvenile probation officer as 

established by the county juvenile board. 

Prior to the passage of article 5138d. V.T.C.S., in 1981, article 

5142 et seq. governed the salaries of juvenile probation officers of 

particular jurisdictions. Article 5142d provides that juvenile boards 

"shall recommend the salary to be paid to [the] Juvenile Officer... 

which salary shall be approved by the Commissioners Court...." 

(Emphasis added). Under this provision, salaries set by the juvenile 

board are not final but conditioned upon the approval of the 

commissioners court. Attorney General Opinion H-1296 (1978). See 

also Attorney General Opinion MW-15 (1979) (same result for counties 

covered by article 5142b, which provides that salaries be "fixed by 

the Juvenile Board subject to the approval of the County Commissioners 

Court"). 

However, in 1981 the Texas Legislature acted to improve juvenile 

probation services throughout the state. As a counterpart to the 

Adult Probation Commission, see Code of Criminal Procedure article 

42.121, the Texas Juvenile Probation Commission was created to provide 

state aid to local juvenile boards and to set standards for probation 

officers. See Human Resources Code §75.001 et seq. 

legislatureprovided 

In addition, the 

for the establishment of county j"W"iLS 

probation departments by enacting article 5138d, which reads in 

pertinent part: 

(b) In all Texas counties, the juvenile board 

or, if there is none, the juvenile court may, with 

the advice and consent of the commissioners court, 

employ and designate the titles and fix the 

salaries of probation officers and of 

administrative, supervisory, stenographic, and 

p. 2179 
, . 

Honorable Tom Wells, III - Page 2 (~~-587) 

other clerical personnel who are necessary to 

provide juvenile probation services according to 

the standards established by the Texas Juvenile 

Probation Commission and the needs of the local 

jurisdiction as determined by the juvenile board 

or, if there is none, the juvenile court. This 

determination, if inconsistent with salaries 

established by laws governing the creation of a 

juvenile probation department for a particular 

jurisdiction, supersedes and controls over those 

statutory provisions. (Emphasis added). 

The legislature thus expressly provides that the compensation 

established under article 5138d overrules salary determinations made 

under all other statutory provisions -- including article 5142d. 

In Commissioners Court of Lubbock County v. Martin, 471 S.W.2d 

100 (Tex. civ. APP. - Amarillo 1971, writ ref’d n.r.e.) and 

Commissioners Court of Hays County v. District Judge, 506 S.W.2d 630 

(Tex. Civ. App. - Austin 1974, writ ref’d n.r.e.), the courts construed an almost identical standard for setting the salaries of adult 

probation officers under article 42.12, section 10 of the Code of 

Criminal Procedure. At that time, article 42.12, section 10 provided: 

[T]he district judge or district judges... are 

authorized, with the advice and consent of the 

commissioners court as hereinafter provided, to 

employ and designate the titles and fix the 

salaries of probation officers, and such administrative, supervisory, stenographic, clerical, and 

other personnel as may be necessary.... 

Given the legislative purpose to create district-wide probation 

services and the intent to place the responsibility for probation 

supervision within the district courts, the courts concluded that this 

statutory language required the judges merely to consult with the 

commissioners court in preparing the probation services budget; the 

conrmissioners court was not authorized to reject the budget submitted 

by the district judges unless the budget was so unreasonable, 

arbitrary, or capricious as to amount to an abuse of the judges’ 

discretion. 471 S.W.2d 107-08. See also Commissioners Court of Hays 

County, supra, at 635; Attorney General Opinion M-393 (1969). 

In enacting statutes, the legislature is presumed to have taken 

notice of court decisions construing prior analogous statutes; 

judicial construction of similar language will be read into subsequent 

statutes. United Savings Association of Texas v. Vandygriff, 594 

S.W.Zd 163, 169 (Tex. Civ. App. - Austin 1980, writ ref’d n.r.e.). We 

are therefore of the opinion that article 5138d confers upon juvenile 

p. 2180 
. . 

Honorable Tom Wells, III - Page 3 (MW-587) 

boards (the administrative units of the judiciary), or in the absence 

of such boards, the juvenile courts themselves, the same authority to 

fix the salaries of juvenile probation personnel that the adult 

probation statute conferred upon district judges regarding the 

salaries of adult probation personnel. This conclusion is in accord 

with recent Texas court decisions which recognize the inherent power 

of a court to compel the payment of reasonable sums of money needed to 

carry out judicial responsibilities, independently of the other 

branches of government. See Vondy v. Commissioners Court of Uvalde 

County, 620 S.W.2d 104, 109-10 (Tex. 1981); Commissioners Court of 

Lubbock County v. Martin, supra. at 110 (district court would have the 

power to appoint probation personnel and set their salaries if such 

action is necessary for the effective administration of the court's 

business). See also Noble County Council v. State, 125 N.E.2d 709, 

714 (Ind. 1955). 

SUMMARY 

The commissioners court must budget and pay the 

salary of the juvenile probation officer as set by 

the juvenile board or juvenile court, absent a 

clear abuse of discretion. 

MARK WHITE 

Attorney General of Texas 

JOHN W. FAINTER, JR. 

First Assistant Attorney General 

RICHARD E. GRAY III 

Executive Assistant Attorney General 

Prepared by Patricia Hinojosa 

Assistant Attorney General 

APPROVED: 

OPINION COMMITTEE 

Susan L. Garrison. Chairman 

Jon Bible 

Rick Gilpin 

George Gray 

Patricia Hinojosa 

Jim Moellinger 

P. 2181