PIPICE DANIEL AUSTENILTEXAS 

ATT"R_YEY CAY-SAIAL 

Kay 5, 1947 

Hon. Homer Garrison,Jr.,Director, 

Texas Department of Public Safety, 

Austin, Texas Opinion No. V-186 

Re: Legality of reimbursement 

or actual travel expenses 

or an agent commissioned 

by the Governor to return 

from a foreign county a 

rugitire fmm justice. 

Dear Sir: 

Your request for an opinion by this department 

upon the above subject matter is as follows: 

"On February 14, 1947, the Hon. Beauford 

Jester, Governor of the State of Texas, appointed Texas Ranger R.'L. Badgett and Mr. 

J, L. Jameson, Sheriff of Montague County, 

Texas, as Agents of the Governor and of the 

State of Texas to proceed from the State of 

Texas to Santos, Brazil, S.A., for the purpose of returning one Irvin (loodspeed, a fugitive from justice from this State who stood 

charged with the offense of murder in Montague County, Texas, 

"Upon receiving notification from the Governor of Texas that R. L. Badgett, Texas Ranger, a member of this Department, had been appointed as Agent for the Governor and for the 

State for the purposes above enumerated, I instructed him to proceed in his capacity as an 

Agent of the State to Santoa, Brazil, to perform the mission as directed by the Governor. 

"We would appreciate it if you would answer the following questions, as Texas Ranger 

Badgett desires to present his expense account for payment to the State for reimbursement of monies expended, on authority of the 

Governor's Commission: 
Hon. Homer Garrison, Jr., Page 2, V-186 

“1. Would Texas Ranger Badget be limited 

to the Five Dollar ($5.00) per diem 

limitation for State employees, or 

could he be reimbursed for the actual 

expenses incurred even though these 

expenses exceeded Five Dollars ($5.00) 

per day? 

n2. Due to the fact that Ranger Badgett 

was in a foreign country where English 

was not generally understood, it was 

impossible for him to receive reeeipts 

for such items as taxi fares, etc. Under the circumstances, therefore, could 

the State of Texas reimburse him for the 

expenditures that he nade in executing 

the directive of the Governor?” 

Your questions cannot be answered categorically. The mat.ter is controlled by Article 1006 of the Code 

of Criminal. Procedure of Texas) the pertinent portion of 

which is as follows: 

“Pay of agent. -- The officer or person 

so commissioned shall receive as compensation 

the actual and necessary traveling expenses 

upon requisition of, the Governor to be allowed 

by such Governor and to be paid out of the 

State Treasury upon a certificate of the Governor reciting the services rendered and the 

ailowance therefor. 

In Brightman vs e Sheppard, 122 Tex, 318, 59 S. 

W, (2d) 112, it is said: 

“Article 1006 in plain and specific terms 

stipulates that ‘the officer or person so commissioned shall receive such compensation only 

as the Governor shall allow for such service.’ 

The services referred to in this article are 

not the limited services covered by the proviso 

of the act heretofore referred to; that is, 

while traveling beyond, the state line. It has 

reference to the entire services of the agent 

in performing the delegated task. In language 

too clear to admit of doubt it is provided, that 

for ‘such services’ the only compen~sation which 

may be determined by the Governor, 
Hon. Homer Garrison, Jr., Page 3, V-186 

“The act of the codifiers of 1923 in ellminatl .ng the proviso contained in the act of 1923 

and substituting in lieu thereof article 1006,, 

with the change heretofore referred to, when 

adopted by the Legislature, manifested an unmistakable intention upon the pertof the lawmaking 

body to require an offiaer oP other person performing the services of returning a fugitive 

from justice from enother state, under aommission from the governor of this state, to look 

alone for compensation to the provisions of article 1006 .‘I 

ri’his Department, in Opinion No. O-4444, following the Brightman case, said: 

“We, therefore, hold that the actual and 

necessary trrveling expenses of the employee of 

the Department of Public Safety, if he traveled 

to California under the ccauaissfon of the Governor as the Qovernox’s agent to return to this 

State such figitlve Prom justice, are to be paid 

from the appropriation provided the Covernor for 

returning fugitives from justiae, and upon the 

certificate of the CoVernor reciting the services 

rendered and the allov#anoe therefor.” 

We adhere to the ruling there made in accordance with the Supreme Court’s decision above quoted. 

SUMWIRY 

The actual and necessary travelin,? expenses 

of a person commiseioaed by the Governor as agent 

to return to this State a fup,itioe from justice, 

are to be paid from the appropriation provided 

the Covernor for returning fugitives from justice, 

and upon the certificate of the Governor reciting 

the services rendered and the allowance made therefor. Art. 1006 V.C.C.P. 

Yours very truly 

ATTORN’EY CENERAL OF TEXAS 

0S:wb: jrb Assistant