a3 

OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS 

AUSTIN 

lonorablo too. 1). Dart 

oount Attorney 

lend@ I 1 oaunty 

noertm, T'rxrr 

iollovm1 

r th0 PO~OO iin 

ea the Jurtiaa 

l thd b0r0m 

l m.ttb to 

and 10 per aent oom~Irslon on 

C. S. authorlcmr the Justiae 

ior aonterpt 0r oourt. 

c. ?. 917, 

rent. of a J&ice of thm Peaoe ehall read1 

rote forth hor thm {$8X;. 

the atats 0r Texas recover 0r the derendant the 

iin0 and coLaa, etc.’ And Art. 919 provider for 

the i8ruancr 0r an sxsoutlon ror the collection 

0r the fine and c0h. Art. 950 C. C. P’. prorid.8 that the County Attorney shall be l ntltled 
&omblo Joe. l . hrt, ?ago 2 

to t0a per 0-t or all rin08, r0rrdtu~0 0~ 

m0a0ym 001100t0d r0r us btm 09 ani7 0-w, 

upon judgmoato roaovore4 br hlr. Art. 1068 

provl4eo that tho rttornrr re noantlng tho 

btatm mhall reaeive 0 roe 0r P 5.00 on a plea 

0r guilty brror8 0 Juotioe Coort. 

9h0 0rm00 0r aontempt 0r ootrrt ~anot be lotked on oo aaflhing but l orlainol 

aooa, sad It appears to ma that the Justice 

should proceed ao In my other arlrlaal moo 

and require paynent of tho aoats. 

On Uorch 6, 1941, we vroto you requootlag l ddltlonal 

Lpioromtlon rslrtlro to the quootlons stated l bovo, and In aomgee thorovlth, on April 5, 1941, rou vroto, la port, QO rolvhlo vu0 oaoo IO. 1904, in Justice court 

Ib. Oae ?reolact, Kendall County. 

*Oct. 26th, 1950, John Cohn vao arrested 

la Kond~ll County for huntIag vlthout a llaease* Vhe aomploint vao ill84 by 8111 Oarntt, Qu, Vardaa, and the a888 vao docketed 

as fa. l87G oa the Justice Doakot at Praciaat 

lo. oaa. herertter 8 varmnt vao loouod and 

ooat to A. 1. Hitrrel4er, Oaae Vardea la Boxsr 

oouaty. Nr. lklttrrlder rem04 tha warrant but 

4ld aot take boa4 from Oohn or brlq hln to 

Booma, la Euotloo Proolaat So. Oao, but aoorpto4 Cohn80 promIs* to appear b0r0m the 

Juo tlal t o ODOI. llothlng more vao hear4 or 

Mr. Cohn uatll l OM tiw In lob-v, 1951, 

vhen llr. Oarrett request&d oa l lloo vorroat. 

Hr. Utofeldor m&de contact olth HF. Cohn 

and Nr. Cohn lmmediatel~ oue up to Boerno 

o.nd plead guilty to the ohm-go. In tho 

oouroe or the oonvoroatloa Coha voo token 

to task by the Juotlao, Hon. t. A. Dreloo, 

oad Oohn endeavored to argue vlth the Court, 

oa the question or Cohnto failure to keep his 

promise in the hunting vlthout lloonoo oaoe. 

‘Be juotloe, not viohlng to hear the 
. 

gaorablo Joe. L Dart, ?rgo 3 

orgummato, (this V&O aa orgumoat bard oa 

Cohn’s ooatoatloa that ho ho4 dono all hm 

rho8114 40 la the premloeo) told Oohn that 

ho hh4n.t ohovn rmoh roopeot for thm oourt 

vhma hm rdhd to appmar briorm and that 

that amt oouplm4 vlth hlo attomt to argue 

the queotloa ooaotituted aoatempt 0r oourt 

~4abm~5~~~4~ t0 riab hir r0r 00ntmt 

. 

Art1010 2386, Yeraoato Annotated Civil 8tmtutem reads, 

in part, as r0ii~0: 

“JUtlaeo of the pee08 shall oloo have 

paver: 

“1. 30 punish say party guilt7 of a oontempt of oourt by tine not to exoeod tveatyfive dolloro and by tiprttooa8eat not rxaeedlag oao 4a.I.’ 

Oontempto or oourt are olooolflm4 as direot and l o lndirect or aoaotruotlve, the test being vhethe~ the ooateapt voo 

orfarad vlthla or out of tho preoonam Of th0 oourt. this dirtlnatloa lo lnportant from the proomdurol 8toadpolatI dlreot 

oontewto arm punlohoblo oumorIl~, vhIle oonotruotlve ooatellpto 

require a dlttwaat and looo draotlo proomoo. 

3 8. Y. (24) 4061 Lx parto, Robertson, 

(rtx art0 mtiirr, 

11 8. W. 6693. 

A oonterpt aorritted In thm prmoeaoo of thm aourt lo 

4onoainatod a direct ooatempt. A ooaotruotlvm aoaterpt IO o8Id 

t0 h p i l 0t 40~0, not in th0 P~OO~O~ 0~ h4bwng 0r th0 00wt, 

but at l dietonce, an aat vhloh tmndo to belittle, to degrade, 

or obotruat, interrupt, prevent or ombarraoo the admlnlotratlon 

or juotlce. 

182 9. w. 313 I 

llx pa-to Vogler, 9 8. Y. (2d) 7331 Ex pa-to Dunoan, 

. 

Under another clao@itlc8tIoa, contempt8 are regarded 

as civil or orlrlnal. Thooo proceedings inotltuted oolol~ ror 

the purpooo of vlndIaatlng the dIgnIt of the oourt are orimlnal. 

From the facto etated In your letter It lo apparent 

that the oontompt vao oomnitted la the presence of the oourt, 

therefore, earning vlthin the dsflnltloa of a direct contempt. 

It further oppeoro that the oontempt proceeding voo instituted 

solely ror the purpose of rlndloatlng the dignity 05 the court 

and vould br olooolfIed l o a crialnol contoqpt l loo. 
fonorrble Joe, l . krt, hgo 4 

VI quot. rm Tmxrm Jurlopru4eacr, Vol. 9, 9. 618, 

noa. 33, l 0 r 0uo +0f 

'Coat-t proome4lago are ewrtlr 

rmgarded am 0rIalnal la their nrtwo won 

vhmn l rlolag ln olvll rotlano. It Ia mid 

that oven in romrdlrl contuo9to 0r the mildest 

o h a r a othorr ter is the l ooeatial 14~ 0r coattmocy, vllful dloobedlonor of ordora and daore00 rde in th0 rdminiotration 0r juotioe. 

mm 0rrra00 10 against the oAmlnlotration 0r 

justloo ma4 rgelnot l oolmtf, aa hmom It lr9lleo arimla8lltp. On this theory tho prooeedlngo should ooaSorm as nurly oo pooolblo 

to prooeedlngo in erlrlnol aooeo. l l l . 

But oontempt procoedlage 8~ not oriminal 

oooeo vithia all the rule8 end drllnltlono 

0r crlainal lav. They ai’8 arid to be of a 

orlmlnal aotur4 beomuor they ore not properly 

oivll suits, and because they lnvolvo the 

idea of thr punishment of unauthorlomd sots. 

They bra netters au1 gemrio. lor is b oonttmpt of oourt M ofreaoe vlthln the moaning 

0r the pens1 oode.* 

rho oaoa 0r Casey vs. state, 25 tex. Rep. 381, uoag 

othrr things, holds la efroot thmt a ooatmt or oourt lm not 

UL orrmaoe vithin the ~ouhg 0r the ?o~l code. Oontmmptm 8ro 

rttmro oui geaerlo, sad not orirlrul oaooo In the omnme ln 

vhiah orlmoo are treated b7 vrltmro upon ori8laoJ lrv. Whmy 

arm ma14 to be of a orhlaal natarm, bmcauao Thor uo not pro9erly oIvll oulto, and booauoo thq involvm thm Idea of the 

pualohment or uaauthorlred mote. 

we quota from the above nontloaed ~008 08 rOllOV8C 

l 4 + +, If a contempt, then, IO not an 

QffeaOo rithia the meaning of the panol oodc, 

Che lava vh:ch regulate It are not repmlod 

by the code of criminal procedure. Ybat, then, 

1s an ofrenso? As defined by the penal oode, 

it $10 III act or omlsslon forbidden by poaltive 

law, and to vhich lo annexed, on oonvlction, 

my punishment prescribed in this oode,’ A 

ooatempt oonnot COBO vithln this definltloa 

beoause no pualohaeat IO preoarlbed f’or it In 

thm oodm. BeoIdeo thlm, l oontellpt lo defined 
. loaonbl. 800. 8. D’rt, Puo 5 

to k ‘a villful 4lom l 4 or 4loobo4lonoo 

of b pub110 authorltT. 4 

m0 b 0r 00at0m 4000 Zvhk Zih%0 

pwvim 0r l it&r 0r tha 004m0. ft r00t0 

upon its ovn 9oaullmlty’, u&4 vhllr it OUI 

not be o&l4 to bo otrlotlf vlthla thm mngr 

of thm 01~11 la+, it lo equal4 4lotlnat 

fwm lam nlat 

mats. Trtu v. Toa 

to orlmbr aad ptmlahSlag, 9 JahBm. 395: 

9h0 otatutos l m l llont sagudlng the praao4uro upon 

adtmmat ior oonte&, It lo said that swrormnoo uot bo ha4 

to the oomon Iav an4 ouch lodifloatlono am arm roua4 in the 

pnoedont l vallablo. When one lo l dJu4gm4 to bo ln oonte@, 

the hot of aoatroveroy should be booortalno4 and drttmmiaa4, 

and thlo adju4laatlon should bo l aterod In the rinut.8 of the 

Oourt, and a vrit or oomltment looue4 thereon, ror it has bman 

unlronly held that I8prloonment tor contempt vi11 not bo tolorated oa a nre vrrbol order of the judge. 

g, p, 632; Rx 

(tax, Jur., Vol. 

loo 8, w. 376. P 

arte MaOrav, 277 8. Y. 6$91 Xx parto Andrevs, 

The ordinary fom Of ju4gmimt lo that the p8rty be 

cdttwl to jail until the fine an4 oooto are paid. 

Robertson, 11 8. W, 669). 

(Rx part0 

Hovever, Artlole 2386, l upra, the 

statute under vhlah the procording vao brought door not authorirr the taxing of ooato la ouoh prooae4ing0, nor no othrr statute that ve have been l bla to find l uthorlo~o tha taxing or 

oooto vhen the prooeedlng lo under Artlole 2386. Therefore, 

ve onover your first qumatlon in the aog~tlva. 

As above stats& a oontmpt of oourt IO not ‘aa oiroaoe 

rlthln the ama* Of the Penal Cod., aad thm l tbtuteo Oi the 

Oode of Crlmlnal Procedi~ro oitrd in your letter, prwl4ing ror 

aomloolono, ire8 ror the attorney repreoentlqg the btatm, rtc. 

are not applicable, because they provide compensation ror oertsln 

oerrlceo rendered in c~oeo involving oftenses vlthin the rsanlng 

0r th0 PIMI ~040. mmreroro, Tour second quaotlon lo reopcctfully onavered in the nogatlre. 

TruotLng that the ioNgoing fully anovoro your inquiry, 

ve are 

APPROVEI-APR 12, 1941 

Yours very truly 

ATTORREY OBRERU O? Tlixk8 

ATTORNEY GEWRAL Or' TEXAS 

AWRB