OFFlCE OF THE AlTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS
AUSTIN
HonorabLa W. L. Edwaada
County At tornay
vlotorla County
VIctoris,, Taxaa .
Dear Sir: : Payment of oountp attornaye
who act aa distriot’attorneys.
Tour letter oi Ootober 14, 19i.1, requsstlng the ’
opinion OS this department reads . In part a8 follows:
“This letter is writtqn in Counsotion with
your Opinion No. O-3773,adarsessd to the Hon.
MO.’ H. Sheppard. m that oplnlon, the aspart-
ment held that Xr. Sartln oou3.U not draw his
salary aa District Attorney during his absence,
an8 that thsri was no evallablo appropriation
for the pafie@ o$ Diatrlct Attorneys pro-turn.
WI are In-booogd with your apinion on those
qu8stlnn0,.
,.
*I now ask you to oonsider tht quest&
rzytm the stsndpoltit di County Attornaya, who
agt In the abaenog of tha District Attornry
under Artlola 26 (OCP) am Amended, whloh reads
as fol.lows~r
*‘Art. 26. J’hr co&Q attorneys shall
,attand the terms or a11 oourts 1 hi
-.oountr below tha Rraae. o*~~bl4tirl%i okrt
and shall remesant the Stat0 Sn all crf&
‘inal casaa =a02 rxamlnatlon or orossoutfon
In ea%d oountvl and in ths absence’ of .tha
dl8trlot attopney hr mhall raDraaent the
State alone. or when rmxmstrd. shall afd
Fhe dlstrlot attorney In the proeeoution
o? any oasa In behalf of the stats in tiia
&&lot ‘oourt. and in auOh oaaea he ahall
rroefve all or one-half of the fees allowed
by law to distrlot attornrye, acoording aa
Honorable Y. L. Bdwards, Fege 2
he sotea e10ce or jolntlx. In suoh oases
, I 11 or one-half of the
~~s~“~;ln$~eb~l~~ t.0 the dlatrlot sttor-
ney aho~3 dutlaa he perforas, or assists
in perforsing, but shall r~aiva no Part
of the CW3titUtiOIVIl 33l3rf 3llOvd to
such district sttornsg, aOOGrdiPg 0s ha
acted alone or faintly; provlds4 that fees
collactoa by the county attorneY from the
state for such sarvloas shall be deducted
by the ComptMJller Of FUbliO ,?.CCCUXd fro=
the faas which othsrwlae would have baa
psid to the district aftorney had ha feW’+
Panted tha State alone; movldad further
t.h;s artiols shall not be OOn3trued ss in-
hibitlng any county attorney froa voluntsrily,
with the Conssnt of ths aistriot ettornws
casirttin;; the district attorney in the per-
for-mnce or 111s respective duties, without
oon,pans~ t ion. s Ii9anatn STcts 1933, 43rd.
Leg. ) p . 177 ) ok’.- 83 . ) ’
“The question thus prsaentsd as 1 a8.a it ia
otion of the vord Vseti” a’s to its
nsalaryn or Qaymr in this
*It Is Ily ,oontantlon that the word VC~B* in
this Statute should be oonstrued with rerar¶noa
to the PurPoW Of the Statutr, whioh in this in-
stanO* *ra* undoubtedly to proola~ ooaren$ation
for County Attorneys, who lsot In the absence or
DistrIOt AttOrn6ys, at. ths 9~x6 rate or pay aa
DIetriot fittOrnsys., and out of the find sat aside
for ‘the EiStriOt Attornsy. The Legislature un..
doubtedb contemplated ttiet at tines ror *oma
resson the 3ietrlct dt~oruey would be unable to
act Or ~.w.O~ mad UG8istanoe, and ior that raasou
.m~ds provision for .the oo~~pene.atlon at the county
b.ttorney. Any othsr conltruotlon laevse the ,“tetuts
without meaniq.
“It fS W cOIlt6ntiOn chat, the F.t.ntuts, Art. 26
afOr%*id, CsD. be conetruad i.n no other.way than
tiint the Y:cnl “f34S” should be Used intsrchangeably
*pith th% \*ords “Fey” or “solaryn, or any other words
d*notlnr coapsnsetion.
Honorebla %. L. Edwards, Fags 3-
“It arpaars to me that thr Legislature ln-
tended that the County Attorneys should be paid
out of tha salary fund of the District Attorney,
and thst the use of the word efeesw, instead of
the word “salary” was sixply an orersl#t. To
substsntiote this stete3ent, I call your attention
to the history o? the various articles involved.
Article 26 vas evidently written at:8 ~tine when
Dlatriat i?.ttorneys T’:SIO on.a fee ba&la. The orig-
inal etotute aaa the seation which 1s above under-
ltned. The 40th Legislature in 1927 araended Art-
icle 1021 C.C;‘r., which prcvldes for the pavxant
of District. Attorneys. Of cours.3, .:.rtlcla iO21,
had the a3ect of taking the Dlstrlct lttornay
off the fee baaie end placifig hlfl on a par diem
basis. The 43-d. Le~ialature in 1933, after the
passage of Article 1621, and its axaandnent, men-
Cad Article 26. The mended pert beicg that
portion ~rhicb 14 net underlinsd above. I believe
it to 53 the laql -resuxotion ihot the Lepislatura
took cognizance of the existing 1~~~6 at the tine
it aada this gjaendxent. If this is correct, the
Legislature then rasaed their a;vand.nent knowing
that District Sttorneys were no longer on a r40
beds, but were on a per diea basis. Therefore,
the intent of the Legislature was evi.dWltly to
raaah any fund@ held by the Comptroller’ to pay
Distrlat Attorneys for the purpose of paying
County Attorneys who act in their stead. Of course,
Article 3886r (R.C.S.) is now the existing atatute
:eith referenaa to gsynent ol Sistriat Attorneya.
The above is cited for the purpose of shoving that
the Legiolature did not intend that tine :+ord ‘Y4e.e”
should be usad in a restricted sense. As above
ststed, *ny other construction laaoes Article 26,
8s aasnddd, wholly valualesa and nesnln~less.
*I do not believe the ‘Jogas case, 67 S.?:. (26)
856, Caters the situation. In the first plaae.
that proceed&? was avldently brou‘;ht to recovsr
r444 aa provided by Article 1025 C. C. P. In the
rsaond plaae the Court in disposing of the aase
altes Article 26 as it existed before ita alend-
slant. The court held that the County Attorney
could not racovtr fees provided by Article 1025
for the reason that the Dlstrlot Attorney ~4s not
on 4 fee basis but was paid under Xrticla 1021 on
a per diem .besis.
Eonorablo X. L.’ ‘Zdwerds, Fege 4
.
“By tai
h- PUS~W.u~Y
----*A-** ” to Artlale 26, passed
sitar the par diem lew, , I believe the Leglaleture
alearly IndiMiteU its intention that themCounty
Attarney should be paid out of the fund or money
set aside for the purpose of paying the Distrlat
Attorney had he sotad.
w;(enlfestly, ii. this intentlop; 1s clearly
lndiaated, a strained or taahnlcsl bonatruatlon
of a mere word rhould not be allowed to defeat
it, lrFeaially when auah aonstructlon.would be
inequitable.
“1 further a611 your attention to the lang-
uage or Section 2, or Art. 38861 R. C. s., the
preasnt salary law. This statute sprclriaally
rsappropriates a&l manlea heretofore appropriated
by the Leglslatura to pay fees, salaries, and
par dlea atiaountr of the o?!i%ers nsmsd.
‘In view of the fact that the County Attorneys
of Vlatorla, Calhoun, s.atuglo and Jackson Countiss
are affected, I ask that you give thla cmttar your
moat aaraful. considera tlon. 7
Artlale 31, Code of-‘Grlmlnal Proobdure, provlcleer
WVheneter any dlatriet & county battornay
rails to attend any .tero of tha distrlat, county
‘_‘or $astlaea courte, the:judge of mid aourta
or luah justloe may appoint some competent attorney
to pariorm the dutlee of euah dlatriat or aounty
attorney, who shall be allowed the sene ooapensa-
tlon ror hia servlaea aa la allowed the Cldtrlct
attorney or aouqty attorney. Said appolntaent
ahsll not extend beyond the tera of the court at
. whiah. it is msde, and shall be vacated upon the
appearance of the dletrict or aounty attorney.”
Ae we understand your request you desire the opinion
of this depertment wlth referenae to the amount or aompeniatlon,
if any, a aounty attorney la entitled when tha aouaty ettorheg
aate in the absence of the dietriot attorney under Article 26,
Code of Crlmlnal Frocedura.
54 think that Artiale 26 snd krtiale 31, supra, mat be
Honorable ir. L. Sdnards, Page 5
eonetrued together, and rhrh ao conatrusd, it is olear that
the Leslalatura has mado it the duty, and it Is llkewlsr the
right,-of thr oounty attornay to rap&sent the Stata in the
district oourtr la the abseaoe of the district attorney. In
..ths sbsancr of the dlatrlot attorney, the duty and thr au-
thority to reprrsoat the Stata In the district court ir ooa-
rarrad by the statutrs upon tha oounty attorney. It Is not
upntraplatrd nor Is it aeoessary, that the oourt should dsslg-
auto the oouatg attorney as district attorasy pro tra. It
la only whoa the dintriot attorney and;tha aounty attorney sre
absent that the. court 1s euthorlrsd to Yhppolat a dlstrlat
sttornsy pro tom. fn a latter oplnlcn addressed to Hoaorabls
Cullea D. Vaaoe, County Attorney, 3dae, Texas, oa ?ebruary
12, 1935, thir dapsrtmsnt rulrd that a dletrict ju&e 1s wlth-
out anthoritr to appoint ra attornsy pro tam to reprsseat the
State whrn either tho dlstriot attorney or tha oounty attorney
le prssoat,
When the oountp attorney acts ia ths abaenoa of the
dlstriot attorary ha must raoalvr his oospsaaatloa for sold
aervlcas under the provisions of Artiols 26, rather than under
the provlalons of Article 31. The rISht of the county attorney
in euah instaaos to conpsnsstloa under Article 26 depends upon
nhathar fare are allowed to the dlstrlot attorney of the dls-
trlot for the services psrforned, la the abseaos of the dls-
trlot attorney, by tha oounty attorney. Slnoa January 1, 1936,
tha dlstrlct dlstrlots of this Stats
an annual salary in
than by tha allowanoa
Clrll Statutes)
*This ooapaasatlon d6aa not depend on the aumbur .of oaa6s
triad, or the result achieved, and rrcludes all other ~oapsn-
ration azoapt hie annual salary.’ .(Vo ea v. Sheppard, Coma.
App. of Tsx. Saotloo A opinion adopt.8 8 by thr Supreme Court, .
67 S.M. (2nd) 856.) Slnoa distriat attorney8 are no longer
oompansated on tha raa basla, but by the payment of en annual
Salary, snd the-l@slstura hasasds no rovlslon for coapan-
sat1 the oonnty attorney who aots la t ii a sbsanoe of the
dlstr Y ot attorney by spproprlatlon to hla a part of the salary
to ba paid to tha dlatrlot attorney, it folloaa that thr oountg
‘attorney who sets la ths ebarner of the distrlot attorney fa
not latltlrd to ooapensstion for tha saroioas thus rendered.
Trusting that the roragolng rully anawara your ln-
q&f, wa m-0
Yours vary truly
Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion
Combined Opinion