Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion

r ORNEY GENERAL 0 P?=XAS October 24, 1958 Mr. 0. B. Ellis, Director Texas Department of Corrections Huntsville, Texas Opinion No. ww-518 Re: Computation of time to be credited on the term of a prisoner while he is con- fined In a State mental Dear Mr. Ellis: hospital. Your request for an opinion cqncerns the question of whether the provisions of House Bill 906, 55th Legislature, Regular Session, 1957, which repeals all existing statutes and makes provisions for prisoners to receive credit for t.ime while Inmental institutionsJ be retroactive In the case of a prisoner who was in Rusk State Mental Hospital at the time the Bill was passed. Section 17 of House Bill 906, 55th Leglslature,Regular Session, 1957, chapter 486, at page 1416, also Article 932b of Vernon's Annotated Code of Criminal Procedure,,provides: "The time a prisoner is confined in a State mental hospital for treatment shall be considered time served and shall be credited to the term of his sentence, but he shall not be entitled to any commutation of sentence for good conduct while he is under treatment in a mental hospital." The effective date of this statute was January 1, 1958. In our Opinion No, O-5721, addressed to the Texas Prison System, Bureau of Records and Identification, Hunts- ville, Texas, we passed upon the question whether inmates of the Texas Prison System who may at various times be ad- julged insane and committed to State institutions for the insane are entitled to the benefits of the commutation of time as prescribed by law. In answering that question, we said: Mr. 0. B. Ellis, page 2 (W-518 ) "We are of the opinion thatthe foregoing discussion dislcoses a legis- lative policy In Texas of not subjecting insane persons to criminal punishment and that the time spent by an insane In a state hospital should not be counted on his sentence as a criminal." This opinion was based primarily on the following authorities: Article 2 of the Penal,Code provides: "The object of punishment is to supress crime and reform the offender." Article 34 of the Penal Code in part reads: 11 No person who becomes insane after he is'found guilty shall be punished while In such condition." Articles 925 and 928 of Vernon's Code of Criminal Procedure respectively provide: "Upon the trial of an issue of insanity, if the defendant is found to be insane, all further proceedings in the case against him shall be suspended until he becomes sane." "If the defendant becomessane, he shall be brought before the court In which he was convlkted or before the District Court In the County in which the defendant is located at the time he is alleged to have become sane; and, a jury shall be impaneled in the Court be- fore which such defendant is brought to try the issue of his sanity; and, if he is found to be sane, the conviction shall be enforced against him as if the proceedings had never been suspended." Also see Article 6184 L, Vernon's Civil Statutes, which provides for allowing convicts overtime for good conduct. Section 16 of Article I of the Texas Constitution pro- vides: c - XI-. 0. B. Ellis, page 3 (~~-518) “ib bili of attainder. ex nest facto law, retroactive law-or any law impairing the obligation of contracts shall be made.!' (lkphasis added.) In 39 Texas Jurisprudence, page 54, we find the follovr- ing language: 11 . . t A statute will not be applied or construed retrospedtively or given retroactive operation, so as to affect existing rights or create new obligations and impose new duties as to past transactiors,unless It clearly appears, from its terms or at least by fair implication, that the Legislature so intended. On the contrary, a statute is generally held to operate prospectively unless a contrary construction is required by the terms or the nature and object of i-.!l e law . It is always presumed that a ;statute, not relating merely to remedies and modes of procedure, is intended to operate prospectively, and all doubts are resolved in favor of such construction." (Giting City of ,Ft. Worth v. Morrow, 284 ,; . Y . 275 . _, L ; ic our opinion after examining Rouse Bill 906, 7 .::$.:::!n 'i!... 7('C) Regular Session, 1957, that the Legislature ,'~: :I ~.,i-,-,t intend either clearly or by fair implication to make ..,LL.yc ;t,-.t-utc retroactive in operation. Even if the statute :!::: rC?;;x::ct4vein operation the retroactive part would be voi,, '3 :>) ,-;,,-, 1;. cj

:I.,y]:j,chplaces all matters of clemency, reprieves, .:ol.:1,:1~::-11t:i.(:!::: and pardons, 1.1~ the Governor. (See Ex Parte ;,;~Y~;~is:lo:,, 152 s.:!. 2nd 289; Gilderbloom v. State, 272 S.W. 2nd ?' )t is our opinion that the time spend by prisoners who i.;~~‘~: :iLn ; state mental hospj.tal prior to January 1, 1958, does ;~!,'I<:(>i?i;;C LX&X- Section 17 of House Bill 906, 55th Legislature, :y~.~~:.y;>.- :~egs:uon,1957; that the time spent by prisoners after ,T~Y.yJlJ~-q? 1~, rgqj, in such state mentz.1 hospitals would come under ;:?oction3.7of- House Bill 906, 55th Legislature, Regular Session, 1?_;7. Mr. 0. B. Ellis, page 4. mw-518) SUMMARY Section 17 of House Bill 906, 55th Legislature, Regular Session, 1957, is not a retroactive statute which would give prisoners credit for time spent while under treatment in a state mental hospital prior to January 1, 1958. Yours very truly, WILL WILSON Attorney General of Texas LEP:mfh Assistant APPROVED: OPINION COMMITTEE Geo. P. Blackburn, Chairman J. Milton Ri~chardson Jack Goodman Wm. R Hemphill Dean Davis Morgan Nesbitt R$?IEW$DVFCRTgr,TTORNEY GENERAL : . .