The Attorney General of Texas
JIM MATTOX Dectmber 5. 1984
Attorney General
Supreme Court BuildinQ Mr. Rsymon L. Bynum Opinion No. a-239
P. 0. BOX 12545 Conmissioner of Education
Austin. TX. 70711. 2545 Texas Education Aglmcy Re: Reconsideration of JM-219
51214752501 201 East 11th Stre’x authority of peace officers
Telex 9104574.1387
Austin, Texas 70 701 comissioned by school districts
Telecopier 512/475-0266
Dear Mr. Bynum:
714 Jackson. Suits 7W
Dallas. TX. 75202.4505 Attorney Genwal Opinion JM-219 (1984) is withdrawn and the
2141742.8944
follotiing is substt.cuted therefor:
4Q24 Alberta Ave.. Suite 160 You have asked the following two questions regarding peace
El Paso. TX. 799052793 officers commiiwioned by boards of trustees of independent
915/533-3464 school districts:
91 Texas. Sub 700 1. What are the responsibilities of the Texas
oourton. TX. 77002.3111 Commission on Law Enforcement Officer Standards
713x?235888 and Education concerning [such] peace officers?
2. Do [such] peace officers . . . have all the
606 Broadway, Suite 312
Lubbaek, TX. 79101.3479
powers. privileges, and immunities of peace
5061747-5238 officers whenever they are in the performance of
their off’icial duties even when they are not on
school property? ([For example during the] hot
4309 N. Tanth. Suite S
pursuit of a person who has connnltted a crime on
McAUen. TX. 75501-1585
512M2.4547 school property, the regulation of traffic on
contiguous streets, and [the] investigation of
crimes committed on school property.)
200 Main Plaza, Suite 400
San Anlonio. TX. 782052797
You advise us that the first question is prompted by the refusal
512l225.4191
of the Commis~3:ton on Law Enforcement Officer Standards and
Education to Hcense putative peace officers commissioned
An Equal Oppotiunityl pursuant to sec:t:ion 21.483 of the Education Code. Thls section
Affirmalive Action Employer provides as follows:
The board of trustees of any school district may
employ campus security personnel for the purpose
of carr],i.ng out the provisions of this subchapter
and if the board of trustees authorizes any
officer to bear arms then they must commission
them as peace officers. Any officer commissioned
under this section is vested with al.1 the powers,
privile$;es, and imm<ies of peace officers while
p. 1074
Mr. Raymon L. Bynum - Page I! (JM-239)
on the property under the control and jurisdiction
of the district o’c otherwise in the performance of
his duties. Any officer assigned to duty and
commissioned shall take and file the oath required
of peace offfcern, and shall execute and file a
good and suffici’znt bond in the sum of $1,000,
payable to the bo.l:rd of trustees, with two or more
good and sufficient sureties. conditioned that he
will fairly, imprlrtially, and faithfully perform
all the duties th.3.: may be required of him by law.
The bond may be ric.ed on from time to time In the
name of any perscn injured until the whole amount
of the bond Is recovered. Any peace officer
commissioned under this section must meet all
minimum standarda for peace officers established
by the Commission on Law Enforcement Officer
Standards and Education within one year of his
commission, or hds commission shall automatically
expire.
The explicit langutlg;e of section 21.483 establishes that:
(1) a school district ‘aoard of trustees may employ campus
security personnel to ciirry out the provisions of subchapter H
of chapter 21 of the Education Code; (2) campus securfty
personnel commissioned ,a:3 peace officers under section 21.483
possess “all the powerc:, privileges, and ilmrmnf.ties of peace
officers while on the property under the control and juris-
diction of [their employi:%g school] district or otherwise in the
performance of [their] duties”; and (3) officers commissioned
under section 21.483 mu8t. wlthin one year of their commisslon,
meet all minimum standards for peace officers established by the
Texas Commission on Lav# Enforcement Officer Standards and
Education, or their commissions automatically expire.
Section 6(c) of article 4413(29aa). V.T.C.S., provides that
[nlo person who i,ces not have a license issued by
the Commission [Orb Law Enforcement Standards snd
Educe tion] shal:L be appointed as a peace
officer. . . .
Section 6(h) of the same statute provides:
‘Peace officer,’ for the purposes of this Act,
means only a person so designated by Article 2.12,
Code of Criminal Procedure. 1965, or by Section
51.212 or 51.214, Pexas Education Code.
It has been suggested ,:hat campus security personnel may not
under any circumstances be regarded as “peace officers,” because
they are not within eltf,er article 2.12 of the Code of Criminal
p. 1075
!4r. Rayma L. Bynum - Page 3 (JM-239)
Procedure sections 51.:!12 or 51.214 of the Education Code and
are therefore ineligible to be licensed as peace offlcers under
article 4413(29aa).
We agree that campus security personnel commissioned as
peace officers under se,:tion 21.483 of the Education Code are
not eligible to be licensed 8s “peace officers” by the comrds-
sion under article 4413(29aa). The express language of sections
6(c) and 6(h) of artif::le 4413(29aa) dictates this conclusion.
This does not mean, however, that such personnel may not be
designated as “peace olificers” by a different statute. Section
6(h) of article 4413(2’)aa) provides only that “for purposes of
this Act,” &. artic,le 4413(29sa), the term “peace officer”
includes only those persons so designated by the enumerated
statutes; it does not rule out the possibility that some
other act may designate someone as a “peace officer.” And this
office has held on several occasions that various sratutes other
than article 4413(29aa:m designate certain individuals as “peace
officers.” See, e.g., A.ttorney General Opinion MW-54 (1979) and
opinions cited therein.
Section 21.483 e:rpressly designates as “peace officers”
campus security persmnel commissioned as such under that
section, and this statute is on an equal footing with article
4413(29aa). When art1c:l.e 4413(29as) and section 21.483 are read
together and harmonize&, ss they must be, Calvert v. Fort Worth
National Bank, 356 S.‘iJ.2d 918 (Tex. 1962). the conclusion
inevitably follows thn: section 21.483 peace officers are a
separate and distinct kind of peace ofiicer. They are not
“peace off leers” under article 4413(29aa). but they are “peace
officers” nevertheless. Of course, they enjoy their status as
peace officers only in certain instances, i.e.. “while on the
property under the control and jurisdlctionTthe district or
otherwise in the performance of [their] duties.” Educ. Code
521.483.
In answer to your first question, therefore, because campus
security personnel cmm~issioned as “peace officers” under
section 21.483 of the Education Code are not eligible to be
“peace officers” as defined by article 4413(29aa), the
comission has no 1:LcensIng responsibility concerning such
officers. Under the express terms of section 21.483, the boards
of trustees of the school districts of this state, not the
commission, have the discretion to decide whether to comlssion
individuals as “peace ,,ff icers” under that statute and the power
to issue such commissj,ans if they choose to do so. The boards
of trustees must require that anyone commissioned as a “peace
officer” under sectLc#n 21.483 must satfsfy the “minimum
standards for peace o:ificers established by” the commission.
including medical, educ,ntional. testing, and other requirements,
within one year. The commission. in its discretion. may consult
p. 1076
Mr. Raymon L. Bynum - Page di (JM-239)
with such boards on :Ile implamentatiou of the standerds.
V.T.C.S. art. 4413(29aa), 02(a)(6).
Your second questlou cannot be answered in the abstract.
As noted, campus security personnel may be employed “for the
purpose of carrying out the provisions of [subchapter h of
chapter 21 of the Educal::.on Code].” They are clothed with the
powers, privileges, and immunities of peace officers “vhile on
the property under the control and jurisdiction of the district
or otherwise in the performance of [their] duties. Whether
campus security personnel are authorized to engage in the
particular activities you describe Is a fact question. The
resolution of this questi,>n is dependent upon the scope of their
duties as defined by their employing school boards and upon
whether they may be said to be “on property under the control
and jurisdiction of the district or otherwise in the performance
of [their] duties” when they engage in such activities.
SUMMARY
The Texas Comtafssion or4 Law Enforcement
Standards has no licensing responsibility
concerning “peace officers” commissioned under
section 21.483 o:I the Texas Education Code. The
scope of the powers of section 21.483 peace
officers depends upon the nature and scope of
their duties as defined by their employing school
district boards of trustees and upon whether, when
they engage in particular activities, they are
carrying out the provisions of subchapter M of
chapter 21 of thl: Education Code and are “on the
property under the control and jurisdiction of
[their employing] district or [are] otherwise in
the performance of [their] duties.”
JIM MATTOX -
Attorney General of Texas
TOMGREEN
First Assistant Attorney General
DAVID R. RICHARDS.
Executive Assistant Attornc,y General
RICK GILPIN
Chairman, Opinion Committer,
Mr. Raymon L. Bynum - Page ,5 (m-239)
Prepared by Jon Bible
Assistant Attorney General
APPROVED:
OPINION COMMITTEE
Rick Gilpin. Chairman
Jon Bible
Susan Garrison
Ann Kraatz
Jim Moellinger
Nancy Sutton
p. 1078