OFFICE OF THE A’ITORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS
AUSTIN
Honorable P. W. Xinter
QountJ A~CtOrnOJ
Jim Eogg COuJd~
Sebbronrllle, Texas
ae
the same t-0 trq to aonwnwe th.e peaasr end
C.D. made an Appearance Bond to Bn8wer muuh oop-
plaint u on the esp%ration of @aid one month~r
tiae; (4 P After mak5.ugthe Appewawe BOA& C.D,
Eowxable F. W. Xlnter, page 0
mqloyed an Attorney vho nov oontende that the
lagietrate war without authority under the law
to po8tpane the hearing, but it va8 compul8ory
upon him to lrmmdiatelp proceed rith euah hear-
ing; while I, as County Attommy, uontend that it
*a8 vlthin the power 0P the Magietrste to portpone
the hearing, and It vae not aompuleory upon him
to lnmedlately proceed therevith.”
Iou 8-t the following quecltione Sor om determlna-
tionr
“1. Where in the judpent of the
trate it tend8 to lerren hard8hip on thevi L
daat, nmy the t(sgi8trate oi hi8 em a&word po8t-
pow a hearlng on a Pews Rand char e, af'ter
the Def’endant 18 brought heiore b&m#
*2. lay the NagIetrate poetpone ouoh hear-
lng upon the application of either the State or
the Befendentt
“3, 18 the %fendaUt entitled t0 tie an
Ap@emanoe Bosld peading pO8tpOWwnt of euah hear-
WV*
The proaeedlnge authorlred by Title 3, Chapter 3 of
the Code OS OrUalnal Roeeduce (Artlolee 79, et seq., O.O.P.)
are unwual in many rerpeatr end artraardlnary in aharaoter,
Although it haa been said that eueh proceeding8 are “generally
regarded in the nature of urlainal proaeediuge,* (I& paste
Oarner, 93 Tex. Cr. R. 179, 246 8.W. 3715 7 Tex. hr. 3P6), there
its no provlelon for a trial by jury (I& perte Qarner, 8upre)g
nor 18 there appwal f’rom the order of a magiietrate requiring a
gye4$pde See a parte Willcinron, 101 Tex. Cr. 8. .336, 278
. . .
X&bear eorpun I8 the only remedy to obtain releaee
from cuetody of one in default o? mak%# the bond, owe it ha8
been tied. The amount of the bond rerte largely vltbin the
nstrglrtrate~e dieeretlon, and vi11 not be dieturbed by a oourt
heming the nit of habeer corpue wikeee the iRqt8trate abu8ed
1,
Ronorablo P. W. linter, pqe 3
hi8 dteeretlon. Rx parts Blaokman, (‘Eex. Or. A.) Il.2 8.Y.
(2d) 7’39. But euoh a oourt till determine vhether the Judg-
wept of the ma@etrato Irae authorlsed under the faOt8, and
if thQ evidenoe ie deemed inrufrlolent, the relator ehould be
dleoharged. Ex parte Allen, 113 Tax. Or. It. 73, 1 8.Y. (24)
58~ Ex parte Wilkineou, lupral Ex parts Ilcmtes, 13P Tex. Cr.
Ri335, 115 S.Y. (2d) 9x2.
We have been unable, after diligent eearoh, to flnd
any .aaee bearing upon the que8tSon J6U 8-t. 8efePeUoe to
the etatutee doer not di8alore my provleion for bond pending
the hearbg, the fom? pertinent artiolee ot the Oode of Oriai-
nal Prooedure read.bg a8 follovr~
‘Article 79. shall lerue wam%Ilt
9heneVer a magl8trate 18 inform& upon oath
that an oifenee I8 about to be oaOitted agaiart
the pereon or property OS the iniorarnt, or of
another, or that any pereon ha8 threatened to oom-
mlt an offenee, it f.8 hi8 duty Umdlately to U-
lw a wrraat Sor the ameet of the Moue6d, that
3-mmay be -ought before euoh ma&htFate or be-
fore come other named in the uarrmt .’
@Artisle 80. ~Aoowed brought before asgietrate
“Uhen the awueed h8e been boUghti before
tie avsgletrate, he &all hear proof ae to the
aooueatlon, and, if he be latlefied that there
ir ‘@et rea8on to apprehend that the OSeMe vae
Intended to be ocmmltted, or that the threat war
8eriouely mede, he eh6bll make au order that the
wowed enter into bond in 8U6h cum ao he may
In hi8 dieo~etlon req e,, aonditioned that
~I11 not 0aamPit au& %w 0 u, and that he VIB
keep the peaoe tovard the pereon threatened or
about to be in$ared, an4 tov+rd a.ll zthere ior
one year from the date of 8Uah bond.
“Artiole 85, Failure to g&v0 bond
“If the defendant fall to give bond he #hall
be oommlttedto Jail for one year irm t&e date
of the firet order requirina; 8uoh bond.”
Ponor&le P. Y. ILater,p4go 4
“Artlele 87. Way dleoharge defeadant
*If the ragletrate bollen* ?wm tha eri-
denoe that there lo no &oqd reaem to agmwhead
that the o??cmee va8 inte#ded or vlll be oommlt-
tad, or that no ler lwethmat mm madeby the
defendant, he &all dieohwge th# raoumd, and
may, In hi8 di8WOtIO& tu tibe aim of th* pro-
0eedl.q agalnet the party emkiq $he ooqplalat.”
It 8eeme to uethat th eh o w ltatutei ooatemplate
an Imediate hearing llgoa the0-t. No8 a readlxw a?
the oaeee olted above, It 18 Zear that one may net b8 poozm-
ly plaoed undar a peaoe bead @P oonflned in jaA1 ?or ?aIZure
to make the bond) until a?teP tbm hu~Iag protlded Artlole
80, at vhloh hearing th elvldoaoo mwf 8h o V eith e rFL t a no r -
fen00 I8 about to be aomitted aga%wt
tlm preaer
o fmo th eo rrh ,a l 8
er io uely
ti3W8ateWd to odt 8
fea88.~ Will thle h~ari~& I8 hold, VMt rertriotIoW may be
By both the afmetitutioaal u&d 8tatutozy prevIeItme
It la dealaredt
'All prleoner8 rhall be bailable by 8u??i-
alent euretlee, wlere io* eapltal O??OSU*I, Wxen
the pr00f I8 WIbantJ but t&I8 pmvI81~ ehall
not be oonstrwd a8 to preront b&l nftor in-
diotmentr0u5lupon examination of the arlrbnoe,
in lueh mwaer ae etay ‘bo preralbod b law. r
(boaatltation of 9tdxa8, llre. 1, 800. I 1; 6.8.P.
1925, Art. 5)
The general rule8 a$ to b~I1 are t6 be found In tip-
ter 4, Pltle 5 of the Oode of gbImlna1 Proeedure.
Honotiable P. W. Minter, page 5
Article
- ._
267
. _
defiae8
-se
'ball' a8 *the eeourity
_-
given
._
by the accuaea tnat ne YXIZ appear am (u18ver oerore the ro-
per court the aocullation brought qainrt bin.' hrtiole~2 %9
deflnee a “ball bond” 861 an undertaking entered into for the
appearance of the principal "bsf$re come court or magirtrate
to anever a criminel accuratlon Artiole 273 preeorlber
the reauieitee of a bail bond, &e of vhich ir that the obli-
gore b&d themeelvee that the~defendant vill appear before
the proper court or magistrate to an8ver the aoousation agaln8t
him. Article 274 is quoted in f'ullr
"Article 274. Rule8 applioable to all oaee8 of
ball
"The rule8 in thir chapter rerpeoting reoog-
nlcances and btril bond8 are applioable to all
8uoh undertaklnge vhen entered into in the tiour8e
of a or-al actioq, whether before or after aa
indiotient, fn every oaee where authority la
given to,z+ny court, judge, magletrate or other
o??ice~,.'.to .requlre bail of a per8on au wed of
*"or of a vltneee lu a or llTl&GtS."
ffiS%%;Ilg our*)
The anever t0 your ?iP#t QUestiOn 18 that there 18 no
authority, etatutory or othervise, for the m@.etrate to poet-
pone a hear on a peace bond oWge becauee ln hle juwnt
it 'tenda to""I ee8en hexd8hlp on the defendant.* It ir our
opinion that the atatuterr oontemplate an %amedfate hearing
beoau8e of the extraordinary oharaoter of the prooeedlngs.
Certainly both tIie State end aooused ehould be affozrded reaman-
able opportunity to procure. vitnseeee and othertire prepare for
orderly preaeatatloc of the facte. lersrthelenr, the object of
!&la nature of proaeedlng d8 to prevent 8eriou8ly threatened
o??en8ee.
For the 8ame rea8on8, your eeoond question ehould
aleo be ansvered in the negative. Zt Ie aontentplated that the
. hearing shall proceed with dlepatcb to attsln the object8 of
the rtatutee, the prevention of a aontemplated or eeriourly
threatened crise. The provlslone of the Code of Criminal Pro-
cedure (Article8 538, C.C.P., et rrep,) have no application in
thie chareater of proceeding.
7530
Ronorable P. Y. linter, pqe 6
- ._ Your third quertion . 18 _awvered
_ in_ the
_ negative.
_ _
In the ltatutee nerelnaDoYe Olted end Uotod, It I8 olear
that the vordr aorlmiual aoou8ation,” Poriainti aotion,” and
“scoured of en o?fen8eW eigril the lnteatlon of the bglr-
lature that there artiole8 app? J to pereoae charged vlth the
actual conpaie8lon of 8ul)etentIve o??erer. Althou& the term
“all. pdeonere’ ie wed Xn the Clonetitutlon, ve ee with
the etatement of the text In 2exae JurIupraden0s T 5 Tu. Jur.
8-1, #St 28 evident that the proVI*Ion vau maat. not to re-
quire all prleoaere +a all cIroummtaaoe8 to be Wl,ed but
to refer to a olaer of prI8onsre.' 0ee lzx prte Rued, 40
Tex. $51, 19 Am. Rep. 32) Rx parte mea, 7 Ta. Or. App. 288.
frueting that the above la tlr fa o tc a eaevei-8
4 ly your
pueetiow, ve Qpe
Ytourevery truly
.
i
h IJ
Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion
Combined Opinion