iionorable Saa 5. Ea.11
County Attorney, Harrison County
Xarsball, Terse
Dear Sir i Attent ion:
ing a copy thereof to each witness tbcreln na2x:d.
wrticle 443CCY as ainanqed in 1931, requirsa the
Clerk of D&B District ‘0iu.t in a felony case, to
is s!:e a 3ubpoena after sworn appl.icathn for s:;ch
witness is arde. 1 find no provision uh!oh a2-
plies to t:k* issuance of coplss of a subgoexta.
Honorable San B. Hail,
“1 find front talkin& with several. old-tim
Shrtriff*s Deputies and %strict Clerks, thtlt
it &IS aaver been tke ousfoia for the Clerk to
issarJ a co>y of an out-of-county subpoem, alId
it &,s alwaga bean the csstoro for the jhei’iff
or hia deputy to presre this Copy to Serve Ou
th% wYYitn393, 80 t hst he alay ba gaid for witnesfi
fat323 upon p?sc:iteti,on to the proper cleric. I
do not fin’% WhaS’Q this QUaStS.GZl k&S 6V8f be%a
passed upon by the courta, or your dewrt!%ent.
Tile old C8Sc1 or EallE+L3 P. Ce?lpbell, 57 Pex:.e,
t-14, seem to ?x agplieable to this sitmtion,
h0:ever, In that caas the queution Pa3 whf,ther
or not Distritt Clerks were sxtitled to a res of
754 for a oopy of i oltatlon required to be served
on tile dafend23t. *be stat&t unde^l” consideration
in that ease prov?ded the Clerk sha.i.1 isam a ctta-
tfoo, and th3t the 32eriilf s:20~ld scfve a co>y there-
of oli the d&en&at; but it did not preooribe by
wbora tt;la true co?y should be prt?Fred,
“In discussing tho case, Jujtlce Bonnsr
ssfd :
“‘It ha3 long be2n the general prac-
tice, usdex- a statilCe not subst:antiallp
differcat il*o:fi tk OBO under oocsidera-
tioa (Pasch, Dig. arte, 1430, 1433), for
the clerk to pre,?r^re tke copy of t;% al-
tation to be som-‘d by tkxz ~hariff on the
defer,daA . This practice, we think,ts
ElG3’6 conducive to the rlececsary accuracy
an8 d!a>atch of buaioaea thim it’ pregased
by t hc sh?rilf; it bal?~ consi&nt with the
genor%l d!ltles of the clerk t~h,h-the ppeeplre
al1 proger prGC8SS, an3 xit h those of tie
sheriff t,hat he execute then as thlls pre-
p-ared and delivered to hl,.(
“It would see:a fros th1a decidfon that the se:.*
rule would asply, and that it would be the District Clerk’s
duty to prepare efficient oopiea of each subpoena for the
nii:lh~eS of witncases subpoensad out of his county.”
niirt. 475. Whesa a wittaos resides out of
the coufrty in which the prosecution is pending, the
State or the defenda??t s&lab be entitled, either in
term t imcl or in vaoatfoa, to e subpoana to Compel
the attendanoe of auoh witnesseo on application to
the proger clerk or mgi5tsate. Such applioatton
shall, be in the manner and fora as provided by
ATtic1e 463."
Article 4BS, Vrrnon*r Annotate4 Code of Crirnlml Pro-
a86ure‘ nhlch is referred to in ,\rtlola 475, sups, reads as
POllOWS :
.
.