Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion

Honorable A. C. Turner, Chairman Board of Pardons and Paroles John H. Reagan Building Austin, Texas 78701 Opinion No. M-833 Re: Does the condition attached to commutation "that subject never become eligible for clemency of any type at any Dear Mr. Turner: future date" preclude parole? you have recently requested an opinion of the following facts: "On the 9th Day of January, A.D., 1953, Governor Allan Shivers commuted the sentence of Robert Ernest Miers, Execution #366, from a death sentence to life imprisonment in the Texas Department of Corrections 'con- ditioned that subject shall never become eli- gible for clemency of any type at any future date'. "This Board is considering parole for this subject, but we feel we should obtain an of- ficial opinion of the Attorney General that will answer the following question: "Does the condition attached to commuta- tion 'that subject shall never become eligible for clemency of any type at any future date' preclude parole under the provisions of Article 781B, Code of Criminal Procedure." Article 781b is now 42.12 of Vernon's Code of Criminal Procedure, under which executive clemency is now granted. -4032- - . Honorable A. C. Turner, Page 2 (M-833) Since the year 1936, under the provisions of the Consti- tution of Texas, Article IV., Section 11, the power to grant commutation of sentence and pardons is vested in the Governor to be granted 'Ionthe written signed recommendation and advice of the Board of Pardons and Paroles, . . .II The photostatic copy of the Governor's proclamation at- tached to your request for an opinion reflects that on January 9, 1953, the Board of Pardons and Paroles recommended that Robert Ernest Miers be granted the commutation of his death sentence to life imprisonment in the Texas penitentiary. Commutation has been defined to mean "the change of the punishment assessed to a less severe one. It differs from a pardon in that it may be imposed without the consent of the convict or against his will." See Ex Parte Lefors, 303 S.W.2d 394 (Tex.Crim. 1957). The commutation recommended by the Board of Pardons and Paroles was a form of clemency greater than the conditional commutation of sentence granted by the Governor. Commutation of the death sentence to life imprisonment alone would have made Miers eligible for parole after serving twenty (20) cal- endar years. Art. 42.12, Sec. 15, V.C.C.P. The commutation that was granted by Governor Allan Shivers was that Miers' death sentence would be commuted to life imprisonment condi- tioned that he never become eligible 'for clemency of any type at any future date. The Constitution of Texas, Article IV., Section 11, relating to the recommendations and advice of the Board of Pardons and Paroles to the Governor should not be con- fused with the right of the Governor to grant under the authority given him by the Constitution, commutations, paroles, pardons, or any other form of clemency that he deems advisable; for there is a marked legal distinction between the power of the Board to recommend or advise the Governor and the Governor's power to fol- low said recommendation. Art. 42.12, Sec. 33, V.C.C.P., provides as follows: "The provisions of this Act shall not be construed to prevent or limit the exercise by the Governor of powers of executive clemency vested in him by the Constitution of this State." In EX Parte Lefors, supra, the Court had before it a question arising m'x construction of a proclamation wherein the Board of Pardons and Paroles had recommended to the GGovernor the commutation of a ten year sentence to time served. The Governor, however, by virtue of the authority vested in him under the -4033- Honorable A. C. Turner, Page 3 (M-833) Constitution granted a conditional pardon conditioned upon several conditions set forth in the proclamation. Lefors was later arrested for having violated one of the conditions of his parole. On haheas corpus to the Court of Criminal Appeals, Lefors contended that he was entitled to discharge from custody because the Governor had not followed the re- commendations of the Board of Pardons and Paroles. In up- holding the Governor's power to grant a lesser clemency than recommended by the Board of Pardons and Paroles the Court stated on rehearing as follows: "The majority are committed to the rule that the greater includes the lesser and the Governor may grant a lesser included form of clemency than recormnended by the Board of Pardons and Paroles but may not constitutionally grant a greater form." 303 S.W.2d at page 400. In Rx -- Parte Redwine, 236 S.W. 96 (Tex.Crim. 1921), the Court of Criminal Appeals stated as follows: "We are of the opinion that, in the exer- cise of executive clemency to one convicted of a felony, the Governor may impose such con- ditions as he sees fit, and this may be done by direct expression or by reference and im- plication, and, as has often been said, it is only when the conditions are illegal, immoral, or impossible of performance that any question concerning them can be raised in the court." In 67 C.J.S. at page 585, we find the following: "Under statutes so providing, the power of prison authorities with respect to commutation of sentence is limited merely to recommending such action to the Governor; and the acceptance of such recommendation as to commutation and the amount thereof is a matter wholly within the discretion of the Governor." At 67 C.J.S., page 588, we also find: "In granting a conditional commutation, the authorized pardoning officer may impose such conditions, restrictions, and limitations as -4034- Honorable A. C. Turner, Page 4 (M-833) he may think proper, provided they are not illegal, immoral, forbidden by law, or im- possible of performance; and the condition may be either precedent or subsequent." In applying the above rule, various conditions have been held proper. In the case of Ex Parte Daven ort 7 S.W.2d 589 (Tex.Crim. 1927), it appears Bi& a person w o was convicted --+--I of murder, and sentenced to imprisonment for a term of ninety- nine years, was pardoned by the Governor on the condition that Lzdb;lco;:ined in some state ;r private hospital for zh;egsy, he was not so con ined the pardon could b by the Governor. The pardon was later revoked by the Governor on the ground that the condition had not been complied with. The Court held that the Governor, in issuing the conditional pardon, reserved the right to revoke it on non-compliance with the conditions named, and was privileged to do so without judi- cial inquiry into the breach. This condition was not unreasonable. In Ex Parte Collie, 240 P.2d 275, cert.den. 73 S.Ct. 1145, 345 U.S. 1000 97 L.F& 1406 (1952), the Supreme Court of the State of Caligornia had before it an ADDlication for Writ of Habeas Corpus wherein the Petitioner (Collie) attacked the validity of a condition imposed upon the commutation of his death sentence>olife-i?nprisonment that he shou never be ~~~?.~~~eGfro;"';ol;d ,!!;; Supreme Court, speakin$lthrough Chief "a commutation is in the nature of a favor which may be withheld entirely or granted upon such reason- able conditions, restrictions and limitations as the Governor may think proper." He then went on to hold the condition was reason- able. In Green v. Gordon, 246 P.2d 38, cert.den. 73 S.Ct. 187, 344 U.S. 886 97L.Ed.1406 (1952), the Supreme Court of Cali- fornia once igain had before it a mandamus action by a person convicted of first-degree murder whose sentence of death was commuted to life imprisonment without parole. The Court held that the commutation of sentence was in the nature of a favor which could withhold entirely or grant upon such reasonable conditions, restrictions and limitations as the Governor may think proper. While it has been held that such a conditional commutation of sentence as is involved in this case is valid, the terms of the conmutation by one governor cannot prohibit his successor -4035- Honorable A. C. Turner, Page 5 (M-833) from changing or modifying its provisions. As was stated in Ex Parte Collie, supra, at page 276: "The terms of the commutation purport to prevent a subsequent governor from granting petitioner permission to apply for parole, but it is clear that one governor has no power to prohibit his successors from chang- ing a commutation of sentence or modifying its provisions. It is the general rule that one legislative body cannot limit or restrict its own power or that of subsequent Legislatures and that the act of one Legislature does not bind its successors. . . A similar rule should apply to the head of the executive branch of state government. Accordingly, the present commutation cannot be given effect as a re- striction on the power of later governors to grant further executive clemency." In answer to your question, the conditional commutation of sentence by Governor Allan Shivers cannot be given effect as a restriction on the power of a later governor to grant further executive clemency upon the written signed recommendation and advice of the Board of Pardons and Paroles. The doctrine of consistent interpretation of executive clemency requires that the present governor give great weight to the reasons that com- pelled a prior governor to act. SUMMARY The conditional commutation of sentence by one governor is not binding on a later governor's power to grant further executive clemency or parole upon the written recommendation and ad- vice of the Board of Pardons and Paroles under Article 42.12, Vernon's Code of Criminal Pro- cedure. However, the present governor, in considering the recommendation of the Board of Pardons and Paroles, may examine all circum- stances relating to the prisoner's confinement and sentence commutation. The doctrine of consis- tent interpretation of executive clemency requires that the present governor give great weight to the reasons that compelled a prior governor to act. -4036- -- . .. Honorable A. C. Turner, Page 6 (M-833) Yours very truly, CRAWFORD C. MARTIN Attorney General of Texas First Assistant Prepared by Gilbert Pena Assistant Attorney General APPROVED: OPINION CO?IMITTEE Kerns Taylor, Chairman W. C. Allen, Co-Chairman Ben Harrison Sam Jones Jim Broadhurst John Reese MEADE F. GRIFFIN Staff Legal Assistant ALFRED WALKER Executive Assistant -4037-