JIM MATTOX 

Altorney General 

supr0m9 c4m 8ullelw 

P. 0. BOX 12540 

Aualln, TX 79711-2546 

5rZN7+2501 

T*Ior 91w57L1357 

l*lecoplw 512l47M295 

4524 Alber(a me., swe lb0 

El Paso. TX. 7-2793 

915i53&348( 

1001 TOXEE. sutte 700 

Nou¶lon. lx. T7w2-3111 

7lY223YU16 

a06 aroadw*y. SUIIO 312 

Lubbock. TX. 794013(79 

Ka747a236 

4309 N. Tmlh. Sub B 

YcAlm. TX 76501-1685 

512m245.47 

2w Makl Plur. sutte 4m 

San Antonlo. TX. 762052797 

512a25-4191 

The Attorney’ General of Texas 

October 22, 1985 

Eouorablc 8. Tati !Lturtieeteban 

chnirmnn 

Natural Rc~ourcc~ Ctmdttec 

Texas StAtA SeaAts 

P. 0. Box 12068, C.al@tol Station 

Austin, Texas 78’l:ll 

Dear Senator Saatimteban: 

~piaion AO. Jx-363 

Re: Authority of A judge to 

restrict the type of ball 

available to s defendant 

You have recpesttd our opinion regarding the authority of A 

magistrate to restrict the type of bail available to AIL accused. 

Artlclc 17.01 of the Code of Criminnl Procedure define6 “ball” AS 

the secu~clty given by the accused that he till 

appear md ausver before the proper court the 

sccusatj,ao brought against bin. md Includes a 

ball bor,d, or a personal bond. (Papbaeis added). 

l-bus * Gill” 16 merely an undertaking by au accuecd, for the 

purpose of cffecl,i.ng his release. It cnn takn At lesst two forms 

under the statute, A “ball bond” or a “persoual boud.” These two 

kinds of bail ‘51 not appear to be exclusive aud. gloen the 

magistrate’s broa’i discretlou in fixing ball, other forms of security 

may be autbo&ed, See V.T.C.S. Art. 1715. 

- 

One form of “6ecurlty” specifically authortied 16 the ball bond 

demribed in nrtic:lc 17.02: 

A ‘bail bond’ 16 a vritten undertaking eutered 

Fnto b!r the defendant and his suretIc for tbc 

sppearance of the prlnclpsl therein before sow 

court (81 magistrate to au6ver A criminal ~CCU~Atioa; p:ov%ded, hovever, that the defendant upou 

execution of 6uch ball bond may d6po6it vith the 

cuetodl6n of fund6 of the court in which the 

orosemtlon IA vendian current wncy of th6 United 

itot. 1,~ the &aunt of. the bond 10. liau of having 

euretGi 

iddcd),- 

eignlng the tame. . . . (EMPHASIS 

Another form of “security” specifically 6uthorlred is the personal 

bond deecribad III article 17.03: 
HOaOrAble H. TAti SAntieAtebAn - IPAge 2 (JH-363) 

The court before whom the cane 16 pending AA~. in 

it6 discretion, reltaee the defendnat on hi6 

perrooal bond without 6ureties or other 6ecurlty. 

In light of the6e conslderc&lone, YOU AAk: 

1. May the court require A defendsot to po6t 

bail fa CA6h only? 

2. May the court Bet the amount of boil but 

Agree to nccept A caeh percentage in lieu of that 

AWUUt? 

3. iay the tour t 6Ct A differential boll 

Amount depending upon the type of bond. &. A 

cash bond of $1,000 or A surety bmd of $lO,OOOt 

In Ex psrte DeAtoa. 582 !;,W.2d 151 (Tex. Crlm. App. 1979). the 

trill court hsd ordered A defendant to post “A $15,000 cn6b bond for 

nppeal purposes.” The court of criminal nppesls held the& 

[t]he Authority grs,ated the court in Article 

44.04 . . . to ‘impose reasonAble coaditloas on 

bail pending the fia%:tity of hi6 convictioa’ does 

not vest the court with the discretion to require 

A cash or surety bond to the exclusion of the 

other. 

582 S.U.2d At 153. LiMee. la Ex parte Rodriguez. 583 S.Y.2d 792 

(Tex. Crib. App. 1979). the C,DUrt of Criminal Appeal6 said that A 

requirement th6t A bond “be ]wsted ia cssh is not nuthorized under 

l rtlcle 17.02.” 583 S.W.2d At 793. We conclude that A mAgi6trnte may 

not require l a AccuAed to post il bail bond in CASb only. 

As to your second questl.oa, boil 16 by 6tAtUt6 the 6ecurlty 

required by A magistrate And May Include A boil bond or A persoaal 

bead. We constnse your question to inquire whether A court my set A 

“boil bond” fn A certain 6mount nad then agree to Accept A leseer 

pcrceatnge la lieu of the face ammat of the “boil bond.” Although 

SuCb practiCs hA6 6ppAreUtly existed ia VAriOU6 TexA6 jurl6dictions, 

6ee 7 8. Wl116oa, Texao CriailUll Forms, 147.19 (Texas Prsctice 1977). 

rdo not believe it i6 sutlwrired by section 17.02. We offer no 

opiaioa oa the coadltioa6 that A magi6trate May require in conjunction 

vith the issu~ace of A per6onr.l bond under eectioa 17.03. 

Fia~lly, we believe it jr Cl-r that A osgistrrte msy not set A 

“dif fereatinl boil Amount” d’cpendiag upon whether A CA6h or surety 

bond i6 used. The r6AsOdag of ruch cA6e6 AS Denton sad Rodriguez 

iadicrter th6t. if A Court ftiH:S boil in tbe 6IMJUat Of $23,000. it MY 

not, under the term6 of nrtic:ic! 17.02. require thnt -at if the boil 

Is 6Ati6fied by eurety bond. hut Accept A leS6Ar amount if the bail 16 

. . I 

\. 

p. 1666 
Roaornble H. Tot1 Snatie6tcb4~mi - PAge 3 (JH-363 

6Ati6fied by CA6h. We emphcdse, however, thAt nrtlcles 17.01 And 

17.15 confer upon A court brood discretion, 60 hllg AS it 16 

rlaeoosbly exercised. in 6ett:tag boll. 

A smglstrste hns brood discretion in rettlag 

the Amount nad coaditioa6 of boil which on Accused 

mu6t sntlsfy to dbftnia hi6 release. Be may not, 

however, require 1~11 ACCU6ed t0 pO6t bAi1 iD cnsh 

only I nor ray be set A differeotirl boil bond 

amount depending upoa whether A cash or surety 

boad i6 glvea. 

Very truly you J & f% 

J In tlATTOX 

Attorney General of Texas 

TOM GREW 

Pirst Assistant Attorney Gawral 

DAVID R. RIGRAFDS 

Executive Assistant Attorney Gencrsl 

ROBERT GRAY 

Specinl Assistnat Attorney G~eaernl 

RICK GILPIH 

ChAirmAn. Opinion Committee 

Prepared by Rick Gilpla 

ASSiStAnt Attorney kD6rAl 

APPROVED: 

OPINION COKKITTBE 

Rick Gilpla. Chairman 

Colin Cnrl 

Susan GArri6oa 

Toay Guillory 

Jim noellinger 

Jenalfcr Riggs 

SArAh Woelk 

p. 1667