Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion

OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY ,GENERAL OF TEXAS AUSTIN Honorable foha F. l4ey Dlrtrlct Attorney 81st Judicial Dl8trlct mrnea city, Texao Dear Slrr We ere ln reaelpt ion from thlr departsieat. f ollove t defendant aever II the tins he was ut durw the appeal, he never cogrilzeace, but 8tayed la jail. the maadate fr0Pl the court of le, our jud$e, through oversight, enteace thla defendrat la order to allow him his time rpeat ln jail, and our judge now desires to do thla if ame 18 poaelble. *prom the foregoing, I vould appreciate very much your op1nlon oa the folio-w: 648 Honorable John F. May, page 2 “(1) C&Q euch defendeat aov be alloved by ’ the district judge the tlmu he has spent la jail prior to the tlme he entered the penitentiary? dom3”(2) If 80, 1~ what maaaer 18 this to be I . . . . (I After a rather exbAuetlve reach of the 8uthorl- ties, we find no procedure by vhlch’the eubjeot of your ia- qulry could be allowed the time spent la jell. Ia so bold- i~lg, ve U’U not uambdfti of the oral decleloae vherela auac pro tuaC orders reformlllg filial judgments have beea upheld. Bovever, it appears that la all of these cares the order eatered, upon proper application, was for the purpose of mnk- lag the record *perk the truth rAthOr tbna changing or alter- lag it. Your question IS uore apt1 aaevered by Judge Oravee la the c&e5 of Rx parts Patkreoa, TCt. of Crla. App. 1940) 141 S.U. (2d) 319, vherela he llaldt ‘It seems that the basis of ~11 euoh povere 18 that the orddra or mlaotee thereof may be’mde to speak the truth relative to the oeaurreaaee about vhlch the mlautee purport to epe8k3 t e aaa aot be .a correctloa of what should hw?%& but oaly a correction to amke the mioutee ~*vhat vail aatwlly dose et the time.” Speaking generally oa the eubjeot of the fl~llty of judmate, it may be uld that a judgment beoomee fine1 at the ead of the term of court at vhlch it vae readered, end this, for the reason that the trial GoUrt irsJ mvd 0% set aside a judgment prior to the alosing of tbe term.’ 12 Teue Jur., SUC. 336, p. 687; Peaa v. State, 24 S.U. (2d) 396. 1~ a felony case where the penalty aeeeeeed ie leee thea death, the sentence constitutes the flr~l judfWat from which en appeal may be takeL Vpoa perfectioa of the appeal, jwledictlo~ of the appellate court attaahee and the trial court 1s poverlees to sec, alter 336, the p.jud6&np end weultlw aed- eace. 12 Tax. JUr., 649 Honorable John F. Uey, pege 3 Article 768, V.A.C.C.P., prior to the amend~ata of’ 1931 end 1941, reed es follows: “If a new trial fS not granted nor the judg- ment arrested in e felony ce,ee, the eeatence shell be pronounced in the presence of the defendant et lny tUDe after the expiration of the time al- loved for meking the motion for e new trial or the motion in arrest oP judgment.” In 1931 the Forty-eeooad Legislature emended thle Act giving to the trial judge the diearetIoaery power to al- 10” aredlt for ti.Qe spent la jail prior to eeatence by the trial court. The Forty-eeveath Legislature In 1941 again emended this Act end enlarged OR this diecretioaery paver eo tbst the trial judge mey allow credit for time spent in jell pending appeal. This Article aov reeds as follows: “If a new trial Is not granted, aor judg- treat arrested in felony c6eee, the eenteace ehell be pronounced la the presence of the defeadeat et any time after the expiration of the time ellowed for making the motion for E new triel or the mo- tfoa in erreet of judgments provided that in all criminal cases the judge of the aourt in vhlch defendent wee convicted, ray within hle dlsaretloa, give the defendant credit on his eentence for the time, or eng part thereoi, which said defendant has apeat in jail in said cause, from the time of his arrest end confinement until hi8 sentence by the trial aourt; end provided further thet in ell ca,eee where the defendant has been tried for sag violation of the laws of the State of Texee, and hee been convicted end has appealed from said judgment end/or eentence of coavfctfoa, and vhere leid cause bee been ef- firmed by the Court of Criminal A peels, and aft- er receipt of the mandate by the 8 lerk of the trial court, the judge 1s authorlsed to e&Win cell eeid defendant before him, end if, pendin appeal, the defendant has not made bond or enter- ed into recogaleaace and has remlned in jail Honoreble Sohm F. May, page 4 pending the time of such appeal, said trial judge lllay then lo hla discretion re-renteace the de- fendant, and may subtract from the original eent- ence pronounced upon the defendant, the length of time the defendant haa lain la jell pending such appeal; provided, however, that the provl- alone of this Act shell not apply efter coavlc- tlon And sentence In felony oases La which boad or recognIaence Is not permitted by law.” It is therefore the opinion of this depArtmeat that the subject of your inquiry could aot be elloved oredit for the tw he spent in jail prior to the time he entered the penitentiary. The dealsions are frlrly uniform thAt vhere, As here, the defendant is committed to the pealten- tiary to begin execution of his eentenae the trlel court loses all jurladlctloa. The trial judge havlag falled or refused to allov credit es provIUed~~yCt~getstute At tha proper time, could not now do so. . . ., Orlmlael T.w, section 1589. Very truly your ATTORNRX 0RKSlA.LOF Tw w /L?. M 04 Ii. T . Bob Dow7. Assistant HTBD:db