Honorable Torn Hanna Opinion No. M-1076 

Criminal District Attorney 

;Jcffetson County Courthouse Re: Questions concerning 

Beaumont, Texan 17701 " responsibility of 

County for Court 

cost8 due Criminal 

Justice Planning Pund 

pureuant~ to'senate 

Bill 841, Acts 62nd, 

' Leg., RX., 1971, 

Dear Mt. Ranna: (Art; 1083, V.C.C;P.) 

In your 'opinion request, you ask the following 

queetionni 

a< 

2. 

‘3; 

'Should convicted defendant earn'credit 

+award cost pf.:court py serving ~time -Sri 

'jail - 'is balance paid by'defendazito be 

pko rated among County Departments or is 

fi%sV~eimpunt'due Criminal."Justicc"P~anning 

Rind dtiucted first?" 

•~Sh6iilb'cqwicfcd defendant.batn’~noug~.’ 

~~E*iill~t*ko~'cldak'all cost-of oourt - 11s !.the 

Cotini&.%eld'rbsponslble*tolkState for ~.'. 

the'kmciur$ due.,'the'Crim!nal'Justic~ .Planning 

*Fund?" 

The'Texam C&e of.Crim.inal Proceduie,..hrticle 1083, 

-5270- 
Hon. Tom Hanna, page 2. (M-1076) 

Sections l-11, creates the Criminal Justice Planning Fund 

and provides for costs of court "to be borne in part by 

those who necessitate the establishment and maintenance of 

the criminal justice system." The statute also provides 

for the appropriation and expenditure of said funds and 

reappropriation of said funds. 

The Criminal Justice Fund provides all the required 

state and local cash matching requirements in the Omnibus 

Crime Control and Safe Streets Act as amended by the 

Omnibus Crime Control Act of 1970. Approximately three 

fourths of all funds raised are passed through to the 

cities and counties for programs within the criminal 

justice system. 

In regard to your first question, it is observed 

that whereas Article 1083 authorizes certa.in fees to be 

collected as cost of court, which ultimately are to be 

paid to the Criminal Justice Planning Fund, no provision 

is there found that these costs are to have priority of 

payment over other costs of Court. Nor is any pro 

ration of costs expressly authorized should only a portion 

of the costs be paid by a convicted defendant. However, 

Section 5 of Article 1083 provides as follows: 

'The costs due the State under this 

Act shall be collected along with 

and in the same manner as other fines 

or costs are collected in the case." 

It therefore-+ollows that if~~the cos~ts taxed in 

Article 1083 are to be collected in the same %iiner--iis 

other costs, a convicted defendant may discharge the court 

costs by.service in jail. Articles 42.15, 43.09, 45.53, 

1019, Texas Code of Criminal Prooedure. The Court of 

Criminal Appeals of Texas has long recognized that persons 

should be given credit on their fine and costs for service 

in jail, or in connection with other types of penal service. The court has also recognized the right of a person 

to serve part of his time in jail and pay the balance in 

cash. Ex Parte Hill, 15 S.W.2d 14 (Tex.Crim. 19291.. 

This office has previously held in Attorney General's 

-5271- 
Hon. Tom Hanna, page 3 (M-1076) 

Opinions Numbers O-469 

(1940) that where only 

(19391, o-755 

a part of the 

collected~, such money as collected should go to the payment of the costs and the balance, if any, to the payment 

of the fine; and where there is not enough collected to 

pay all of the costs, the money should be pro rated in view 

of the fact that no cost had any priority over another. 

(1939) and O-1792 

fine and costs are 

Accordingly we conclude, in view of the language of 

Section 5, together with the prior cited opinions of this 

office, as well as the lack of any expressed provision 

requiring funds appropriated under Article 1083 to be deducted first, that the costs taxed and owed to the Criminal 

Justice Planning Fund do not have priority of payment over 

other costs of court; and should only a portion of the 

costs be satisfied by cash, the only equitable and valid 

disposition would be proration. 

In answer to your questions 2 and 3 concerning the 

responsibility of the County for court costs due the 

Criminal Justice Planning Fund pursuant to Article 1083, 

we believe it is clear from the purpose of the statute 

(as set out in Section 1) that the legislature intended 

that convicted defendants pay the costs, not the County 

or State. The State would not be entitled to reimbursement 

for those costs without a law requiring the County to make 

payment to the State on the basis of the time the convicted 

Defendant was hald in jail. We have no existing law to . 

such effect. Furthermore;fn Sections 6 and 7 of Article 

1083, the statute distinctly provides that the county is 

responsible for the funds collected and that those funds 

be remitted to the Comptrol-ler of Public Accounts. We 

find no indication in the statute that the Legislature intended the County to be responsible for costs due the 

Criminal Justice Planning Fund when uncollected or satisfied by service in jail. Absent such a statute, the County 

would not,be liable for such costs. 

Therefore you are respectfully advised that our opinion 

is that the county is not required to pay out of county 

funds any portion of court costs due the Criminal Justice 

Planning Fund which are served out in jail by a convicted 

defendant. Whenever a convicted defendant pays only a 

-5272- 
Hon. Tom Hanna, page 4 (M-1076) 

portion of the total court costs due and serves out the 

rest of the costs in jail, the money collected is to be 

pro rated. 

SUMMARY 

The county is not required to pay out of 

county funds any portion of the wurt costs due 

to the Criminal Justice Planning Fund which are 

served out in jail by a convicted defendant. 

If a convicted defendant pays a portion of the 

total court costs and serves.out the remainder 

of the wets in jail, the motley collected is to 

be pro ra!ed among the various costs including 

the amqunt due the Criminal &stice Planning 

Fund. ,No cost has prioriJy Over another. 

Prepared by Guy C. Fisher - 

Assistant Attorney General 

APPROVED: 

OPINION COMMITTEE 

Keik 'Taylor-, ‘Qtafnuan 

W; E;'Allen~!';'.Co%hairman 

Austin-Brayy; 

Rob Gauss 

Bill Flanary 

Glenr'Brok. 

SAMUEL D. MCDANIEL 

Acting Staff:Legal Assistant 

ALFREDWALEER 

Executive Assistant 

'NO&A WHITE 

First Assistant 

C. MARTIN 

General of Texas 

-5273-