## THE ATIXBWNEY GENERAL. OF TEXAS
**Ausm. T-s**  **78711** October 30, 1975

The Honorable Martin D. Eichelberger Opinion No. H-728 Criminal District Attorney McLennan County Re: Whether a person who has Waco, Texas been arrested onawarrant from another county and released on bond inthe county inwhich he was arrested should be rearrested if the sheriff of the **county** which issued the warrant believes the surety is inrufficient. Dear Mr. Eichelberger: You have requested our opinion regarding whether a person who has been arrested on awarrant from another county and released onbond inthe county inwhich hewas arrested should be rearrested if the sheriff ofthe county which issued thewarrant believes the surety is insufficient. You state that the defendant was arrested by the sheriff of McLennan County on seven misdemeanor warrants issued out of Dallas County. Following his arrest, defendant’s bail was set by a magistrate of McLennan County, andthereafter, the sheriff approved defendant’s bonds and released him from custody. Subsequently, the sheriff of Dallas County returned the bonds and requested that defendant be rearrested. You inquire whether the sheriff ofMcLennan County may properly rearrest defendant inthese circumstances. Although a sheriff is authorized by article 17. 20 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to accept bail bonds inmisdemeanor cases, this provision applies only where no bail has been set or where bail has been set by ajudge andthe defendant is injail. The controlling statute here, we think, is article 17. 09, which provides that a defendant’s bond, once given, shall be valid for his personal appearance “before any. . .court towhich same may be transferred, andfor anysnd all subsequent proceedings had relative to the charge. I’Section 1. The statute indicates further that,. “when a defendant has once given bail for his appearance in answer to a criminal charge, he shall notbe required to give another bond inthe course of the same criminal action except as herein provided. ” Section 2.

p. 3109The Honorable Martin D. Eichelberger - page two (H-728)

Section 3of article 17.09 furnishes the only exception. Itprovides that: [Wlhenever, during the course of the action, thejudge or magistrate inwhose court such action is pending finds that the bond is defective, excessive or insufficient in amount, or thatthe sureties, if any, are not acceptable, or for any other good and sufficient cause, suchjudge or magistrate may, either interm-time or invacation, order the accused to be rearrested, and require the accused to give another bond in such amount as thejudge or magistrate may deem proper. The Court of Criminal Appeals has indicated that this provision is tobe strictly construed. 

### InExparte Coker, 319 S.W. 2d 120 (Tex. Grim. App. 1958), the relator, after being released on=000 bond, was thereafter indicted for murder with malice and placed injail. Thejudge had neglected, however, to order relator’s rearrest.‘: The Court held that, in the absence of such an order as provided in section 3of article 275a (the predecessor of article 17. OS), relator was entitled to remain at liberty under the bondpreviously entered into before the magistrate.

. In our opinion, the Coker principle is equally applicable to cases inwhich a defendant is arrested andleased on bond in a county other thanthe one in which charges against him are pending. Only the .judge of the court where the case is pending may determine notto accept defendant’s bond and, as a consequence thereof, order his rearrest. Although thejudge may refuse to accept the bond “for any. . .good and sufficient cause, ” we do not believe that the sheriff of that county is authorized to refuse to accept the said bondfor any reason. Article 2372 p-3, V. T. C. S., dealing with the licensing and regulation ofbail bondsmen does notpresently apply to a bondwritten andaccepted in McLennan County. Accordingly, it is our opinion that a defendant who has been arrested on awarrant from another county and released on bond in the county inwhich he was arrested should be rearrested only uponthe issuance of an appropriate order by thejudge before whom charges against him are pending, in accordance with article 17.09 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

p. 3110. L
The Honorable Martin D. Eichelberger - page three (R-728)

SUMMARY A person who has been arrested on awarrant from another county and released onbond in the county inwhich he was arrested should be rearrested only uponthe issuance of an appropriate .order by thejudge before whom charges against him are pending, in accordance with the provisions of article 17. 09 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. -Very truly yours,

Opinion Committee jad:

p. 3111