ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS GREG ABBOTT

January 14, 2009

The Honorable Bobby Lockhart Bowie County Criminal District Attorney Post Office Box 3030 Texarkana, Texas 75504

Dear Mr. Lockhart: Opinion No. GA-0690
Re: Authority ofCity ofTexarkana municipal officers under various circumstances (RQ-0717-GA)

You inform us that the Texarkana, Texas Police Department and the Texarkana, Arkansas Police Departmentjointly operate a Bi-State Narcotics Task Force and a Metro Swat Team.! In relation to those units, you·ask questions about the powers that peace officers ofTexarkana, Texas and Texarkana, Arkansas possess. Request Letter at 1-2.
Your questions address two distinct groups: (1) peace officers ofthe Texarkana, Arkansas PoliceDepartmentwhile inTexas; and (2) peace officers of the Texarkana, Texas PoliceDepartment while inArkansas. Becausethe Arkansas courts andthe Arkansas Attorney General arebettersuited to opine onArkansas law, we decline to comment onyour questions to the extentthatthey implicate that state's law. 2 We therefore limit this opinion to your questions as they relate to Texas law.
You first ask whether peace officers employed by the Texarkana, Arkansas Police Departmenthave powers inthe State ofTexas outside the territorial limits ofthe City ofTexarkana, Texas, and ifso, how far those powers extend. Article 2. 124(b) ofthe Code ofCriminal Procedure provides:
A commissioned peace officer of a state of the United States of America adjoining this state, while the

.officer is in this state, has under this subsection the same powers, duties, and immunities as a peace officer ofthis state who is acting in the discharge ofan official

ISee Request Letter at 1 (available athttp://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov).
2FormerArkansas Attorney GeneralMike Beebe issuedan opinionthataddressedquestions relatingto the arrest powers that Texarkana, Texas police officers possess while in Texarkana, Arkansas. See Ark. Ope Att'y Gen. 2006-175 (concluding law enforcement officers ofTexarkana, Texas have arrest powers in Arkansas under the circumstances authorized in Ark. Code Ann. § 16-81-115). Likewise here, your questions concerning Texarkana, Texas peace officers while in Arkansas might be directed to the Arkansas Attorney General for comment.The Honorable Bobby Lockhart

- Page 2 (GA-0690)

duty, but only in a municipality some part ofthe municipal limits of which are within one mile ofthe boundary between this state and the adjoining state and only at a time the peace officer is regularly assigned to duty in a county, parish, or municipality that adjoins this state.
TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 2.124(b) (Vernon 2005) (emphasis added). Under a plain language construction ofthe statute, subsection (b) grants peace officers from an adjoining state jurisdiction throughout the municipal limits ofa municipality that is within one mile ofthe border but not beyond those municipal limits. 3 Although Texas municipal peace officers may have jurisdictionunder specific circumstances beyond the municipal limits, article 2.124, subsection (b) expressly limits the powers ofa peace officer from an adjoining state to the municipal limits ofthe Texas city and not beyond. 4
The powers granted to peace officers from an adjoining state under subsection (b) exist regardless of whether the cities on either side of the border have entered into an interlocal cooperation agreement under chapter 791 ofthe Government Code, the Interlocal Cooperation Act (hereafter"theAct"). See generallyTEX. CODECRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 2.124(b) (Vernon2005); 

### TEx. GOV'T CODE ANN. §§ 791.001-.033 (Vernon 2004 & Supp. 2008). However, the Act allows local governments to contract with each otherto collectively perform certain governmental functions. TEX. GOV'T CODE ANN. § 791.011(a) (Vernon Supp. 2008). The Act defines "local government" to mean a "county, municipality, special district,

... or other political subdivision ofthis state or another state." Id. 

### § 791.003(4)(a) (emphasis added). You inform us that, pursuant to the Act, the cities ofTexarkana, Texas and Texarkana, Arkansas have entered into the Interlocal Cooperation Agreement for Mutual Assistance in Law Enforcement (hereafter "Interlocal Agreement"), an agreement whereby the peace officers ofeach city can serve as law enforcementofficers ofthe.other city. Underan interlocal cooperation agreementthe officers providing law enforcement services are in fact officers ofthe local governmentreceiving the officers' services. See Tex. Att'y Gen. Ope No. GA-0189 (2004) at 6 ("[D]eputy sheriffs ofone county acting as peace officers in another county under an interlocal agreement would in fact be officers ofthe law enforcement authority ofthe county receiving the officer's**service~.").**

3you also question whether subsection (b) means that "neither agency can go beyond" one mile into the adjoining state. LetterBriefat4 (available athttp://www.texasattorneygenera1.gov). Subsection(b) does notcreate such extensive restrictions onpeace officers from the adjoining state. The phrase "some part ofthe municipal limits ofwhich are within one mile" by its terms restricts which cities the statute applies to. TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 2. 124(b) (Vernon 2005); see also TEX. GOV'TCODE ANN. § 311.011(a) (Vernon 2005) (words and phrases shall be read in context). It does not limit thejurisdiction ofpeace officers from an adjoining state to within one**~ile** ofthe border.
40ther statutoryprovisions grantpeace officers from adjoining states limitedpowers while inTexas for specific reasons. See, e.g., TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 2. 124(a) (Vernon 2005); ide art. 14.051(a). Such provisions may grantjurisdiction broader than article 2.124, subsection (b), and this opinion should not be construed as limiting the jurisdiction granted through provisions other than subsection (b).The Honorable Bobby Lockhart

- Page 3 (GA-0690)

Thus, when peace officers originally employed by Texarkana, Arkansas serve as law enforcementofficers in Texarkana, Texas pursuantto the Interlocal Agreement, they are considered law enforcement officers ofTexarkana, Texas. See 

### ide As such, they have the same powers and duties as members ofthe Texarkana, Texas Police Department, subjectto any**limit~tions** createdby the Interlocal Agreement itself. It is therefore necessary to look to the terms ofthe Interlocal Agreement to determine the jurisdictional limits ofthose officers. Because this office does not construe contract terms, we decline to comment on whether the Interlocal Agreement extends the jurisdiction for peace officers originally employed by Texarkana, Arkansas while they serve in Texarkana, Texas pursuant to the agreement. See Tex. Att'y Gen. Ope No. GA-0302 (2005) at 2. We simply observe that such an agreementcouldprovidejurisdictionfor those officers equal to that ofTexarkana, Texas officers.
You also ask whether "peace officers employed by the Texarkana, Arkansas Police Department have legal authority to use deadly force in the State ofTexas while deployed as a part ofthe TexarkanaMetro SWAT Team." Request Letter at 1. You note that article 2.124 ofthe Code ofCriminal Procedure, which addresses the powers ofpeace officers from an adjoining state, "is silent onthe issue ofdeadly force." LetterBriefat4. Althoughthat statute does not expressly allow an officer from an adjoining state to use deadly force in Texas, it gives an officer from an adjoining state, who otherwise meets the statutoryrequirements, "the same powers, duties, and immunities as a peace officer ofthis state who is acting in the discharge ofan official duty." TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 2. 124(b) (Vernon 2005).
Based on your Letter Brief, it appears that your question arose because ofthe language of article 2.124, subsection (a) ofthe Code ofCriminal Procedure. See Letter Briefat 4. You suggest that article "2.124 states that a commissioned police officer from [an] adjoining state has the same powers, duties, and immunities as aTexas police officer, butthenthat article sets specificlimits, i.e. physical custody ofan inmate at [a] medical facility; transporting an inmate; regain[ing] physical custody." Id. However, the "specific limits" that you refer to apply only to the powers granted in subsection (a), when a peace officer is transporting an inmate to a medical facility in Texas. See TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 2. 124(a) (Vernon 2005). Subsections (a) and (b) ofarticle 2.124 were enacted at different times and for different purposes, and nothing in the statute itselfor the legislative history suggests thatthe limits on power in subsection (a) apply to the powers granted in subsection (b).5 Thus, we conclude that under article 2. 124(b) a peace officer from an adjoining state, who otherwise meets the requirements ofthat statute, has "the same powers, duties, and

5See Act ofMay 8, 1995, 74th Leg., R.S., ch. 156, § 1, 1995 Tex. Gen. Laws 1006, 1006-07; HOUSE COMM. ON PUB. SAFETY, BILLANALYSIS, Tex. H.B. 1155, 74th Leg., R.S. (1995) (purpose ofbill was to "allow commissioned peace officers ofa neighboring state to have the same powers, duties, and immunities as Texas peace officers, but only whiletransporting an inmate from aneighboring countyto and from ahospital in Texas"); Actof May 3, 1999, 76thLeg., R.S., ch. 107, § 1,1999 Tex. Gen. Laws 544,544; HOUSECOMM. ONPUB. SAFETY, BILLANALYSIS, Tex. H.B. 165, 76th Leg., R.S. (1999) (purpose ofbill was to allow "law enforcement agencies in another state to enforce Texas laws in a municipality which is split between Texas and another state").The Honorable Bobby Lockhart

- Page 4 (GA-0690)

immunities," including the powerto use deadly force, "as a peace officer ofthis state who is acting in the discharge ofan official duty." TEX. CODE CRIM.PROC. ANN. art 2.124(b) (Vernon 2005).6
As discussed above, the powers grantedto Texarkana, Arkansas peace officers under article 2.124(b) exist regardless of whether the local governments have entered into an interlocal cooperationagreement. However, when servingpursuanttothe InterlocalAgreement, peace officers ofTexarkana, Arkansas are considered officers ofTexarkana, Texas, and they possess the same authorityto use deadly force as members ofthe Texarkana, Texas Police Department, subjectto any limitations created by the Interlocal Agreement. Thus, depending on the specific terms ofthe Interlocal Agreement, their authority to use deadly force may be broader than that granted under article 2. 124(b). Because, our office does not construe contract terms, we decline to comment on whetherthe Interlocal Agreementextends the authority ofTexarkana, Arkansas peace officers to use deadly force beyond the municipal limits ofTexarkana, Texas.

6TheLegislaturehas articulated standards regardingthe authorityof peace officerstouse deadly force. See TEX. PENAL CODE ANN. § 9.51(a), (c)-(e), (g) (Vernon 2003). Whether the use ofdeadly force is authorized in a particular circumstance is a fact question, and this office does not resolve fact questions in the opinion process. See Granger v. State, 3 S.W.3d 36,39 (Tex. Crim. App. 1999) (quoting Hayes v. State, 728 S.W.2d 804,808 (Tex. Crim. App. 1987)); Tex. Att'y Gen. Ope No. GA-0620 (2008) at 4-5 (resolution offactual issues not amenable to the opinion process).The Honorable Bobby Lockhart

- Page 5 (GA-0690)



### SUMMARY
Article 2.124, subsection (b) ofthe Texas Code ofCriminal Procedure grants limited powers to officers from an adjoining state while in Texas in circumstances where the municipal limits of a municipality are within one mile ofthe boundary between this state and the adjoining state. Under that provision, the jurisdiction of peace officers of the Texarkana, Arkansas PoliceDepartmentextends to the municipal limits ofTexarkana, Texas and not beyond.
Article 2.124(b) also grants those officers from the**adjoinin~** state the same powers, duties and immunities as an officer ofthis state who is acting inthe discharge ofan official duty. Thus, officers ofthe Texarkana, Arkansas Police Department, while in Texarkana, Texas, have the same authority to use deadly force as an officer of this state. Underthe Interlocal CooperationAct, whenpeace officers of Texarkana, Arkansas are serving as law enforcement officers in Texarkana, Texas pursuant to the Interlocal Agreement, they are considered law enforcement officers of Texarkana, Texas. Thus, when serving pursuant to that agreement, they have the same jurisdictionallimits and authorityto use deadlyforce as officers of the

. Texarkana, Texas. Police Department, except as limited by the

Interlocal Cooperation Agreement.

ANDREW WEBER First Assistant Attorney General
JONATHAN K. FRELS Deputy Attorney General for Legal Counsel
NANCY S. FULLER Chair, Opinion Committee Virginia K. Hoelscher Assistant Attorney General, Opinion Committee