JIM MA?TOX 

Attorney General 

Supreme Cowl Building 

P. 0. BOX 1254a 

Austin. TX. 78711. 25.9 

51214752501 

Telex QlolS74-1367 

Telacooier 5121475-0266 

714 Jackson. Suite 7W 

DaIhs. TX. 75202.4508 

2141742-8944 

4824 AIWRa Ave.. Suite 160 

El Paso. TX. 799052793 

91515333494 

. I Texas. Suite 700 

HO”SlO”. TX. 77OQ2.3111 

713l2255886 

EN Broadway, Suite 312 

Lubbock. TX. 79401.3479 

SOSi747.5238 

4309 N. Tenth. Sutle S 

McAlle”. TX. 785ol.lS85 

5121682.4547 

203 Main Plaza. Suile CO 

Son Antonio. TX. 782052797 

512/225-4191 

The Attorney General of Texas 

0::ober 24, 1984 

Mr. Reymon L. Bynum 

Conrmissioner of Education 

Texas Education Age n :y 

201 East 11th Street 

Austin, Texas 78731 

Dear Mr. Bynum: 

Opinion No. m-219 

RI?: Authority of peace officers 

commissioned by school districts 

You have askwl the following two questions regarding peace 

officers commissiowd by boards of trustees of independent echool 

districts: 

1. What are the responsibilities of the Texas 

Commission on Law Enforcement Officer Standards 

and Education concerning such peace officers? 

2. Do such peace officers . . . have all the 

powers, privileges, and immunities of peace 

officers whenever they are in the performance of 

their official duties even when they are not on 

school property? ([For example, during the] hot 

pursuit of a person who has committed a crime on 

school p’roperty. the regulation of traffic on 

contiguous streets, and [the] investigation of 

crimes co:mnitted on school property.) 

You advise us that :he first question is prompted by the refusal of 

the Commission on Law Enforcement Officer Staodards and Education to 

license putative Iwace officers commissioned pursuant to section 

21.483 of the Education Code. This section provides as follow: 

The board of trustees of any school district may 

employ campus security personnel for the purpose 

of carryiag out the provisions of this subchapter 

and if the board of trustees authorizes any 

officer tc bear arma then they must connaission 

them as peace officers. Any officer comissioned 

under this section is vested with- all the powers. 

privilege,,, and immunities of pesce officers while 

on the pr,>perty under the control and jurisdiction 

of the dis,rrict or othervise in the performance of 

his dutic!ri. Any officer assigned to duty and 

commissiowd shall take and file the oath required 
Mr. Raymon L. Bynum - Page 2 m-219) 

of peace officers, aod ahall execute and file a 

good and sufficfent boad In the au0 of $1,000, 

payable to the board of trustees, vith two or more 

good and sufficient sureties, conditioned that he 

will fairly, impsrtlally. and faithfully perform 

all the duties that nay be required of him by law. 

The bond may be sued on from tima to time in the 

name of any person l.njured until the whole amount 

of the bond is wcovered. Any peace officer 

coaunissioned under this section must meet all 

minimum standards for peace officers established 

by the Commission on Law Enforcement Officer 

Standards and Education within one year of his 

commission, or his commission shall automatically 

expire. 

The explicit language of’ section 21.483 establishes that: (1) a 

school district board of trustees may employ campus security personnel 

to carry out the provisions of subchapter H of chapter 21 of the 

Education Code; (2) campus .,wurity personnel commissioned as peace 

officers under section 21.483 possess “all the pavers, privileges, and 

immunities of peace officers ,rhile on the property under the control 

and jurisdiction of [their employing school] district or otherwise In 

the performance of [their] duties”; and (3) officers commissioned 

under section 21:483 must, within one year of their cowmission. meet 

all minimum standards for Ilesce officers established by the Texas 

Cosunission oo Law Enforcement Officer Standards and Education 

[hereinafter TCLEOSE], or their commissions automatically expire. 

Section 6(c) of article 4413(29aa). V.T.C.S., provides that 

[n]o person who dowl oot have a license issued by 

the Commission [on Law Enforcement Standards and 

Education] shall be appointed as s peace 

officer. . . . 

Section 6(h) off the same statute provides: 

‘Peace officer,’ 1 cr the purposes of this Act, 

means only a persor so designated by Article 2.12. 

Code of Criminal I’rocedure, 1965, or by Section 

51.212 or ,5! .214, Texas Education Code. 

It has been suggested that csapus security personnel may not under any 

circumstances be regarded ac, “peace officers,” because they are not 

vithin either article 2.12 of the Code of Criminal Procedure or 

sections 51.212 or 51.214 cmf the Education Code and are therefore 

ineligible to be licensed as peace officers under article 4413(29aa). 

We agree that campus tiecurity personnel commissioned as peace 

otficers under section 21.483 of the Education Code are not eligible 

p. 984 
Mr. Raymon L. Byoum - Page 3 (JH-219) 

to be licensed aa “peace officers” by the commission under article 

4413(29aa). The express language of sections 6(c) and 6(h) of article 

4413(29aa) dictates this conclusion. This does not meao. however, 

that such personnel may not be designated as “peace officers” by a 

different statute. Section 6(h) of article 4413(29aa) provides only 

that “for purposes of this Act,” &, article 4413(29as), the term 

“peace off ice?’ 

--- 

includes only those persons so designated by the 

enumerated statutes; it dew not rule out the possibility that some 

other act may designate somwne as a “peace officer.” And this offlce 

haseld on severs1 occasions that a variety of statutes other than 

article 4413(29aa) designat,? certain individuals as “peace officers.” 

See, e.g., Attorney GeneraIL Opinion MU-54 (1979) and opinions cited 

therein. 

Section 21.483 expresrily designates as “peace officers” campus 

security personnel commissioned as such under that section, and this 

statute Is oo an equal footing with article 4413(29aa). When article 

4413(29aa) and section 21.M are read together and harmonized. as 

they‘must be, Calvert v. Pwt Worth Nat&al Bank, 356 S.W.Zd- 918 

(Tex. 1962). the conclusion inevitably follows that section 21.483 

campus security personnel are peace officers who by the very terms of 

‘section 21.483 must meet .1:11 TCLEOSE minimum standards within one 

year. Those standards include licensure by TCLEOSE. Of course, they 

enjoy their status as peace officers ouly in certain instances, i.e., 

“while on the property under the control and jurisdiction of the 

district or otherwise in t’w performance of [their] duties.” Educ. 

Code 521.483. 

In answer to your f::rst question, therefore, because campus 

security personnel commissioned as “peace officers” under section 

21.483 of the Education Cods are not eligible to be “peace officers,” 

as defined by article 4413(29aa), the commission has oo licensing 

responsibility coecerning t’wse officers. Under the express terms of 

section 21.483, the boards of trustees of the school districts of this 

state, not the commission, have the discretion to decide whether to 

commission individuals as “peace officers” under that statute and the 

power to issue such commissions If they choose to do so. The boards 

of trustees must require that anyone commissioned as a “peace officer” 

under section 21.483 satisf:r the “minfmum standards for peace officers 

established by” the cowission, including medical, educational. 

testing. and other requirenents, within one year. The cocaaission in 

its discretion may consult with such boards .on the implementation of 

these standards. V.T.C.S. art. 4413(29aa), 12(a)(6). 

Your second question cannot be answered in the abstract. As 

noted, campus security personnel may be employed “for the purpose of 

carrying out the provisions of [subchapter M of chapter 21 of the 

Education Code] .‘I They are clothed with the powers. privileges, and 

immunities of peace officer:5 generally “while on the property under 

the control and jurisdict:cln of the district or otherwise in the 

performance of [their] duties.” Whether campus security personnel 

p. 985 
Hr. Rsyaon L. Bynum - Page 4 (m-219) 

would be authorized to eagnge in the particular activities you 

describe is a fact question. The resolution of this question depend8 

upon the scope of their duttes as defined by their employing school 

boards and vhether they maI’ be said to be “on property under the 

control and jurisdiction wf the district or otherwise in the 

performance of [their] duties;” vhen they engage in such activities. 

2’ u n n A u Y 

The Texas Colnlission on Law Enforcement 

Standards has no licensing responsibility 

concerning “peace officers” commissioned under 

section 21.483 of the Texas Education Code. The 

scope of the pouczs of section 21.483 peace 

officers depends upon the nature and scope of 

their duties as defined by their employing school 

district boards of trustees and upon whether, when 

they engage in pclrticular activities. they are 

carrying out the Ilrovisions of subchapter M of 

chapter 2 of the Mucation Code and are “on the 

property under the control and jurisdiction of 

[their employing] district or [are] otherwise in 

the performance of Itheir] duties.” 

JIM MATTOX 

Attorney General of Texas 

TOM GREEN 

First Assistant Attorney General 

DAVID R. RICHARDS 

Executive Assistant Attorney General 

Prepared by Jon Bible 

Assistant Attorney General 

APPROVED: 

OPINION COMHITTEE 

Rick Gilpin, Chairman 

Jon Bible 

Susan Garrison 

Ann Kraatx 

Jim Moellinger 

Nancy Sutton 

Bruce Y oungb load 

I 

. 

p. 986