OFFICE OF THE A’IIORNEY OENERAL OF TEXAS 

AUSTIN 

Bonemblr 23. B. Ritehop 

county 4torney 

Jarrp8r County 

;raaper , Texar 

carsfull~ ootmiasraa by t 

your request aI fol&onrt 

6. Qso I want td maki lQ:o1ear, if 

I aid not in my 8tatclment cg the'aare to, pou, 

the aentsnce read that the a4mnd*at, was to 

aorve four months in jail alid pay the 'Wbts of 

oourt . As I understand your ruUng,'daspibo 

the 'grant or time aervd, and dsrglte the fabt 

deiendant he6 esrvsd prior to esataoo ample 
ftonomble B. 3. Bi)ahey, Jr., Page & 

tire for both ooets of oourt ana tho l ea teo eo 

et the-court ef four monthr In the 

omait oould be allawed %A tho ! 

ell, 

all 8entsaae 

but not aa the Ooat8 of oourt. Ther~tore, 

ter the offlaere to be entitled to their Ises, 

the soets .of 00urt rotaa haveto be servea out 

eubss:;uento the eenteaoo by the oourt. Am 

I right In this interpretation or your ruling? 

wSe~~ndly, where there ie a Jail l entsnoe 

and ooeto semed out in Jail by a defendant tn 

8 lPlilJd@JIeaAOF 088e afISS88Sa iA OOUAty OOUl’t, 

are the offiaors OAtitiOd to their OAC, half 

re0rv IA other worda, ie there any dlfferenae 

where there is a &ail eentenos and costs aeseeeed egalAst a defendant or where there ir a line 

and oosto aeeeesea? That ia are ths offfaere 

entitled to their half fees in either cam whsre 

the mano tar4 laid out IA jail? 

"Thirdly, say via have a fins OZ &.oO.oO 

cusd ooste of ooart aa a fudgnent in oeuuty 

0ou.e against the a~feAdaA~, ana in the 8e~- 

teAUe the TiIdg@ &PAAtA ainr the t-0 66 a OrSdit 

8fl the iiAt3 and 60ete that he has alX'eae e.rted in jail#iOr t0 ~O~ViOtiOA and B'SAtSA@e. 

hia euppo~scln ouah lnataaoe, the,.detendaAt 

had spant~%i#m day5 in jail prior to thir USAtense, tkk3a he 18 giitan 0r8aif for the toA aa 

OA the tfAe and 008t8. Can such Wedit be a r - 

mea, and are the o~~ioersl sntitlfifd to their 

one-halt fee6?" 

&ticlu '108, 984 and 1065, Vernon'e Anaotated 

Tess codo of Criminal Prooeaurs, read ae ~iollcm~ 

"Art. Viii. It a new trial IS not mxmtsd. 

nor jUd,gnrs~t'a~reated iA felOAy eaee8, *he - 

santsnos shall bo pronounoed in the pr~at1~08 

of the defendant at any tfxse after the erplratiOn Of th8 tine allowed for UIaktag the leotiOA 

for a new trial or the motion in arrsst 0r duagepent; provided that in all orimtnal aaee8 the 

judge of the aourt in whloh dafeadaAt MI OOQvlotsd, my within his di5eretioA, give the 

dafendant credit on hi8 %QAta~88 for the time, 

or any Fart thereof, wMch maid dsfeadaat ha8 
Eanosable St. B. IUtober, Jr., me 8 

spanO in jail in said oaitse. from the time 

ot his arrest eaa oonfinrarnt until hlr HOten08 W the trial OouPtt aad rodgad further that in all .Oaeee where t ii 0defedant 

has been tried for any ViOhttiOA df the lawn 

of the state Of ~~exae, 8nd ha0 baSn oonrlded 

and he* appealed from paid judeppent and/or 

ssntonoe of oanviotlon, and whore aaia m~uso 

has been affIrma by the Court of Crlmilul 

Appeals, ,and after receipt of the mandate by 

the Clerk of thr~ trial aourt, tha JuQe la 

authorized to -iA Call said dSfSA&aAt before him, and if, ponaing appeal, the aefqdaat has not made bond or entered into::rq@#?e 

mAea and ha POE8iAOa iA jail QsAdiA&thS: ~.: 

time of l uoh appeal, mid trial judge xuy’~.Chan 

in tir aimOretfOA co-eentoaoe the def,endknt, 

and may eubtraot from the origiinl eentenoe 

pronounoed upon the a~f88bib.d, t&a length ,of 

tlae the &SftIAdaAt hoe Lain lo jalL pentU~- 

mob ,apprl) provtbdd, boweror, that the 

prorleion8 o? t&U kt shall not apply atbor 

oonviatlon~aad ~*e5tanoe in f*l~mJ aaeell; la 

w&+eh bond or rsooguimaoos ia not poxmftted 

byl&aw.” 

*APL .v%4. Ii the.~poni#hment’ie ~4’~ 

other than a fins, the jud@kelit shdl. Spea$$Y 

it, and order' it entoroeb'by the proper pa+&- 

OlS8. X~,,rJzart:&so aajoage the ~ooear .,j;” 

against the’ aef~k&nt, and order ‘4210: oop&+ 

t&on thereOf ah in eth4r oa~ee.* 

“Art. 1086.: The O’OUAtj ehaU ‘AOt be, 

liable to~the offitter aAa *itnese’:ba 

008te in a ~miSdW!!aAOr eaeo where defen %~ at 

paya his fine @AtI -3OStS. ThS OOUAty O&u 

be fieble~ for one-half of the feeil of the 

offloer8 of the Uourt, ~when the ddfenaant faifr 

to~pay hiP,flnO(l and lays his fine out in the 

oounty jail or alewirges the ham by rnw 

or WorklAg such fine out OQ the oOunfy’~e 

or OA any so\tnty pmjrth AIUI to pay #ad 

half of oDsta, the C,OUAty Clerk shall iePU8 

his WarmAt on the COUAty Treasures kn favor 
! 

Honorable R. B. altohey, Sr., Page 4 

of auoh offloer to be paid out of the Bead 

and Eridye Bun& or other funda not otherwise 

appr&priated.m 

The cnae of ?!ix perte Mann, 46 S. W. 828, holds 

that the poser 0r the Governor to re5il.t iin and rorf%itUr8S Uoee not extend to the releaao of the oonvloted 

person from the payment of the ooete asseetzed asinst him. 

WO quote rroa the opinion lia said oaes es follows: 

And r0li0wing thi8 idea, our 

iI: Btate v Dyches Z8 Tex. 

535, hold thai the govern& hed & authority 

to rem&t the ooats. It seem to be a rule 

or eknost universal applloatfon that the remission by p~&.Ion at e fine or forfeiture 

cannot deveet an interest in either whioh by 

law la vested In a private person or perrons,. 

The authority of the governor to pario: ir remit rines, forieitures, and penaltie 

ie one placed within his power end authority 

by the people of *this state, to be exeroieed 

in the name and behalf of the people, and it 

ia ror the benefit of the public. He is 

their repraesntatlre. They have not conrsrrsd 

authority up011 him to take eway the rights 

of individuals or or orriorrrs of the state 

the roii0wing authorities in support or the 

views herein expree6wd: Ex parte KoDonald, 

2 Ehtirt. 44C; %tep V. Lrcy, 79 Iowe, 419; 

23tst.e v. Forley, 8 Dleokf. 229; St6b V. 

L5c0'm3nlo, %I MO. 292; Sohuylklll Co. V. 
k 

Honorable R. 5. Rltohey, Jr., Pago 5 

heiisnyder, Cb Pa. St. 4461 Hollidey v. People, 

6 Gllman, 214; 1 Bish. Cr. Law, 1 Old; &I re 

BoYa 8 34 Ku. 573, 9 Pac. 2401 State 'I. 

74 h‘. C. 98i Ssith v. State, b Lea, 6371 

Nooney, 

C$it;, Cr. Law, 742, 7841 3 Xmt. 240, 241; 

ubr. 250, ZB7; 4 Bl. Comm. 5991 U. 8. 

v. Lakaster, 4 &cash. C. C. 64, Fed. Gee, No. 

15$57; In re Flournog, 1 Kelly, bob; Blaok, 

Conet. Law, p. 2782 In re Yiheeler, 34 Kan. 

D6, 8 Pao. 276; ?eople V. Cotton, 14 Ill. 4141 

i&Cool v. State, 23 Ind. 127) Moore v. Green, 

73 1:. C. 394; Nuswr v. Stwert, 21 Ohio St. 

3531 hx partcCottrel1, 13 Aeb. 193, 1.3 PJ. Vi. 

174; Hawes V, Cookaey, 13 Ohio, 242.w (Underscoring onret.) 

It la our opinion that the power ot the oourt under 

Artlole 708, V. A. C. C. P., eupre, tc filve the detendent 

credit on his sentence ror the tlma, or any part thereof, 

which said defendent has epent in jail in said oauae, etc. 

authorize8 the oourt to credit such time on the defendant*@ 

rlne or jail sentence but doe6 cot authorize the court to 

releaae the derendant from the coatts because we would 

impair the rested rights of the otfiaerr in fee’ countlea 

who had earned the raea. The oourt should adjudge<, the 

ooste agalnst the defendant and should not attempt to ranlt 

the ooste. In anewr to your iirot queetion It is our 

opinion that you have eorreotly.interpreted our opiuion No. 

o-4lbQ. 

Opinion No. o-1719 or this deportment, a oopy or 

which is encloeed herewith, an8wers your seoond que8tion in 

the afrirnatlte. 

In amwer to your third queetlon it ia our opinion 

that the oredit should be allmed on the fine end not on 

the co&a. The derendant would still owe the costs, however. if he served out the oosts in jail or on the oounty 

farm or other oounty projeota oubseqkt’to the conviction, 

the orricsre would then he entitled to their half ooiat8 rr0m 

the county under Article 1056, V. ir. C. G. P. 

Vary truly your8 

WJF:Gl ~.-'.&A