The Attorney General of Texas 

July 19, 1982 

MARK WHITE 

Attorney General 

Supfma cuun BUilOlW 

P. 0. Box us45 

Atmhl. lx. 7S711. 2545 

5W475-2591 

Tdex QlwS74-1357 

Tdsopia 5121475mS5 

IS907 Main St.. Suite 1499 

Dallas. TX. 752914709 

2141742.5944 

,B24 Alberta Ave.. Sulle lo[) 

El Paso, TX. 789052792 

OlY532.34S4 

1220 Dallas Ave.. Suite 292 

Houston. TX. 770026986 

71318500566 

1106 Broadway. Suite 312 

LUobock. TX. 79401-347s 

Bw747-5235 

43W N. Tenth. Suite B 

WAllan, TX. 755Ol.lSB5 

312m82-b547 

209 Main Plaza. Suite 400 

San Antonlo. TX. 782052797 

51212254191 

An Equal Oppwlunityl 

Aflirmativa Acllon Employer 

Mr. Robert 0. Vitcrna 

Executive Director 

Texas Comieaiou on Jail Standards 

P. 0. Box 12985 

Austin. Texas 78711 

opinion no. PllJ-497 

Be: Accrual of good time 

credit by jail inmates 

Dear Mr. Viterna: 

You have requested en opinion from this office concerning House 

Bill No. 647 passed by the Sixty-seventh Legislature which pertains to 

the manual labor of county jail prisoners and the commutation of time 

for good conduct and for the perforuence of manual labor. Acts 1981. 

67th Leg., ch. 708, at 2647. Rouse Bill No. 647 amends articles 43.10 

and 45.53 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, and article 5118a. 

V.T.C.S. 

You first ask the following question: 

Do the provisions of section 1 of House Bill 

No. 647 apply to work performed in the county jail 

and/or the rehabilitation center? 

Section 1 of House Bill No. 647 amends article 43.10 of the Code 

of Criuinal Procedure. The provision of the auended statute would 

spply to work perforned by a uisdeueanor convict during his 

incarceration in the county jail, but only if such labor is used upon 

public improvements. Sec. 4. 

This office reached the same conclusion in opinions on a similar 

question concerning the use of misdemeanor convict laborers. Attorney 

General Opinions E-1101 (1977); O-3260 (1941). Itach of those two 

opiniona considered vhether it would be necessary to establish a 

county workhouse or a county farm in order for a commissioner’s court 

to utilize the labor of persons convicted of misdemeanors. on public 

roads, bridges or other projects of the county. Both opinions 

construed the applicable language of articles 43.09 and 43.10 of the 

Code’ of Criminal Procedure and concluded that the labor of a 

misdemeanor convict could only be used upon public improvement. These 

provisions remain identical in pertinent respect to the earlier 

versions following the recent amendments by the Sixty-seventh 

Legislature. 

p. 1777 
Mr. Robert 0. Pitema - Page 2 mu-497) 

Article 43.09 provides in relevant psrt: 

When a def eudaut is convicted of a 

misdemeanor... he may... be put to vork in the 

workhouse. or on the county farm, or on the public 

improveuents of the county.... 

Article 43.10 provides in relevant part: 

1. Each comiasioners court x provide for 

the erection of a workhouse and the establiehuent 

of a county farm in connection therewith for the 

purpose of utilisiug the labor of said parties so 

convicted; 

. . . . 

4. They shall be put to labor upon public 

works.... (Emphasis added). 

It becomes clear when these two articles are read together that 

the provisions of article 43.10 refer to three types of labor as set 

forth in article 43.09. You express coucero ia your request letter 

that a particular county has neither a workhouse nor a county farm. 

The comissioners court has authority to establish these facilities to 

utilize convict labor, but it is not required to do so. 

You next ask: 

Do the provisions of section 1 of Eouse Bill 

No. 647 apply to innate6 going to be transferred 

to TDC? 

As already noted, section 1 of Eouse Bill go. 647 smende article 

43.10 of the Code of Criuiual Procedure. Article 43.10 does not apply 

to felouo who are in county jail merely awaiting transfer .to the 

Department of Corrections. Article 43.10. by its express term. 

applies “vhere the punishment assessed in a conviction for misdemeanor 

is coufinement in jail for uore than one day, or... the puniehuent is 

assessed only at a pecuniary fine and the party so convicted is unable 

to pay the fine.” Where a person is convicted of a felony, and the 

punishuent assessed is only a fine or term of jail, or both,’ the 

judgment may be satisfied in the same manner as a misdemeanor 

c9nviction. Code Criu. Proc. art. 42.10. Thus, where a person 

convicted of a felony is punished by jail time, a fine, or both, 

article 43..10 spplies to him. ‘fhe punishment of confinement in the 

county jail is to be distinguished from iuprisonuent in a Department 

of Corrections institution. See Code Grim. Proc. art. 42.09. il. 

Since an inmate who is to x transferred to the Department of 

p. 1778 
. . 

Mr. Robert 0. Viterna - Page 3 W-h97) 

Corrections has not been convicted of an offense punishable by 

confinement in jail, he is not subject to the provisions of article 

43.10. 

You next ask the folloving question: 

Under section 2 of Eouse Bill No. 647, hov uuch 

credit can be given aa inuate with a one-year 

sentence? 

Section 2 of Eouae Bill No. 647 amends article 5118a. V.T.C.S., to 

read as follows: 

in order to mcourage county jail discipline, a 

distinction uay be made in the term of prisoners 

so as to extend to all such as are orderly, 

industrious and obedient, comforts and privileges 

according to their deserts;.... &mutation of 

time for good conduct, industry and obedience may 

be wanted the inmates of each countv la11 bv the 

sheriff in charge. A deduction in. t&ae not to 

exceed one (1) day for each day of the original 

sentence actually served may be made from the term 

or terms of sentences when no charge of misconduct 

has been sustained against the prisoner. This Act 

shall be applicable regardless of whether the 

judgment of~fouviction 18 s fine or jail sentence 

or a combination of jail sentence and fine; 

provided, hovever, that such deduction in time 

shall not exceed one-third (l/3) of the original 

sentence as to fines and court costs assessed in 

the judpent of conviction. A prieoaer under two 

(2) or uore cumulative sentences shall be alloued 

c-ration as If they vere all one sentence. For 

such sustained charge of uiaconduct in violation 

of any rule known to the prisoner (including 

escape or attempt to escape) any part or all of 

the coamutatlon which shall have sccrued under 

this Act in favor of the prisoner to the daa 

said misconduct may be forfeited and taken away by 

the sheriff.... No other time allowance or 

credits in addition to the commutation of time for 

good conduct herein provided for may be deducted 

frou the tens or terms of sentences. The sheriff 

shall keep or cause to be kept a conduct record in 

card or ledger form and a calendar card on each 

inmate shoving all forfeitures of coseNtatlon time 

and the reasons therefor. (Emphasis added). 

p. 1779 
l4r. Robert 0. Viteraa - Page 4 m-497) 

The underlined portions indicate the changes msde by House Bill No. 

647 in this article which otherwise is virtually unchanged since 

adopted by the Fifty-fourth Legislature in 1955. The major changes 

increase the time l llowabls for good conduct and llmlt forfeiture of 

cmtation to that accrued under thlr act. 

The legislature also carried over the provision originally 

enacted in 1955 which states: “No other time allowance or credits in 

addition to the commutation of time for good conduct herein provided 

for may be deducted from the term or terms of sentences.” See Acts 

- 

1955. 54th Leg., ch. 461. at 1182. 

At first, article 5118a, V.T.C.S., would seem to limit the total 

credit which could be deducted from a one-year sentence to six months 

(or one (1) day for each day of the original sentence actually 

served). Flowever, this was clearly not the intent of the 

Sixty-seventh Legislature. 

Eouse Bill No. 647 added a totally new provision to article 43.10 

of the Code of Criminal Procedure which provides 8s follows: 

For each day of manual labor, in addition to 

any other credits allowed by law, a prisoner is 

entitled to have one day deducted from each 

sentence he is serving. The deduction authorized 

by this Act, when combined with the deduction 

reauired bv Article 42.10, Code of Criminal 

Procedure, -1965, may not exceed two-thirds (2/3) 

of the sentence. (Emphasis added). 

Sec. 1, subsec. 6. 

The first sentence of this section shows the legislsture’s 

intention to provide for cmtatlon at the rate of one dsy for each 

day of manual labor In addition to other credits allowed by law, k. 

those allowed by article 5118a. The courts will, If possible, give 

effect to all sections of a single statute. Threshing Machine Company 

v. Eowth. 293 S.W. 800 (Tex. 1927). We should attempt to harmonize 

and alve effect to the addition to article 43.10 as well as the 

amen&ent to article 5118a. 

When the limitation set forth in article 5118a is read in the 

context of both acts, it becomes clear that this was intended to be a 

limitation on the authority of the sheriff to reward an Inmate for 

“good conduct, industry and obedience” by commuting up to “one (1) day 

for each day of the original sentence actually served... when no 

charge of misconduct has been sustained against the prisoner.” The 

deductions provided for in article 43.10 have nothing to do with 

either the “good conduct” of the inmate or the authority of the 

p. 1780 
Hr. Robert 0. Vlterna -‘Page 5 (MU-497) 

sheriff. A prisoner becomes automatically “entitled” to these credits 

as a sort of compensation for “each day of manual lebor.” 

The Sixty-seventh Legislature specifically llmlted the sheriff’s 

authority to forfeit c-ration time to “any part or all of the 

cmtation which shall have accrued under this Act." @mphasls 

added). 

If an Inmate received the maximum mount of good time credit 

allowable under article 5118a and worked each day of his 

incarceration, he would discharge three dsyr of his sentence for each 

day served. Thus. on a one-year sentence, an inmate could receive a 

maximum of eight months credit. 

Article 43.10 provides that “[tlhe deduction authorized by this 

Act, when combined with the deductions required by article 42.10 of 

the Code of Criminal Procedure. 1965, may not exceed two-thirds (2/3) 

of the sentence.” Article 42.10 does not seem to “require” any 

deductions. Eowever, it would not appear to be necessary to analyze 

the legirlatlve intent behind this particular sentence in order to 

answer your specific queetion. Clearly the deduction authorized by 

article 43.10 when combined with the deductions authorized by any 

other existing statutes would not exceed eight months on a one-year 

sentence (or two-thirds of the sentence). 

Your fourth question is as follows: 

Do the provisions of section 2 of House Bill 

No. 647 [amending article 5118a. V.T.C.S.] apply 

to inmates going to be transferred to TDC? 

Such an iomete Is technically confined by order of the court In 

the Texas Department of Corrections and is therefore subject to the 

provisions of article 6181-l. V.T.C.S., regardlng good time. See Ex 

paa:’ ;311$, 548 S.W.Zd 905 (1977). -- 

In addition, article 5118a states 

[t his Act shall be applicable regardless of whether the 

judgment of conviction is a fine or jail sentence or a combination of 

jail sentence, and fine.” (Emphasis added). It clearly, by its own 

terme, is not applicable to sentences for Incarceration in the Texas 

Department of Corrections. 

Your fifth question is as follows: 

Under section 3 [of Eouse Bill No. 647 which 

amends article 45.53. of the Code of Criminal 

Procedure] since the act states that fines are 

satisfied ‘at the rate of not less than $15.00 for 

each day, ’ can the sheriff or justice of the peace 

increase the credit given aga1na.t fines? 

p. 1781 
Mr. Robert 0. Vlterna - Page 6 (W-497) 

Article 45.53 of the Code of Crlmioal Procedure provides in part: 

A defendant placed in jail on account of 

failure to pay the fine and coets can be 

discharged on habeas corpus by showing: 

. . . . 

2. That he has remained In jail a rufflclent 

length of time to satisfy the fine and costs, at 

the rate of not less than $15 for each day. 

The sheriff has authority under article 5118a. V.T.C.S.. to 

commute up to one-third of the total fine assessed against a defendant 

who is serving out a fine In the county jail. Rx parte Mlnjareo, 582 

S.W.2d 105 (Tex. Grim. App. 1978). The court relied on the following 

language of the current version of article 5118a: 

A deduction in time not to exceed one third (l/3) 

of the original sentence may be made from the term 

or term of sentences.. . . This Act shall be 

applicable regardless of whether the judgment of 

conviction is a fine or jail sentence or a 

combination of jail sentence and fine.... 

Acts 1963, 58th Leg., ch. 371, at 943. The only change in this 

language relates to the amount of the deduction in time. Under this 

provision, the sheriff’s action would in effect increase the credit 

given against such a fine above the $15 allowed by article 43.09. 

SUMMARY 

The provisions of article 43.10, V.T.C.S.. of 

the Code of Criminal Procedure apply to work 

performed by a misdemeanor convict during his 

incarceration in the county jail, but only if such 

labor is used upon public improvements. These 

provisions do not apply to convicted felons who 

are merely in county jail awaiting transfer to the 

Texas Department of Corrections. The maximum 

amount of credit which could be given to an inmate 

with a one-year sentence would be two-thirds of 

his sentence or eight months. The provisions of 

article 5118s. V.T.C.S., do not apply to inmates 

who are merely awaiting transfer to the Texas 

Department of Corrections. The sheriff could 

increase the credit given against a fine beyond 

the rate of $15.00 per day by commuting up to 

one-third of the total fine assessed sgainst a 

p. 1782 
*. . 

Hr. Robert 0. Viterna - Page 7 (Ml-497) 

defendant in addition to the credit allowed under 

article 43.09. V.T.C.S. 

v-.-&g 

Attorney General of Texas 

JORN W. FAINTER, JR. 

First Assistant Attorney General 

RICRARD E. GRAY III 

Executive Assistant Attorney General 

Prepared by Maury Rexamer 

Assistant Attorney General 

APPROVED: 

OPINION COMMITTEE 

Susan L. Garrison, Chairman 

Jon Bible 

Rick Gilpin 

Maury Hexamer 

Patricia Rinojosa 

Jim Hoellinger 

p. 1783