An employee of the City of Midlothian is not barred by Article XVI, §40 of the Texas Constitution, nor by common-law incompatibility from simultaneously serving as a director/officer of the entity formerly known as the Mountain Peak Water Supply Corporation, and now designated as the Mountain Peak Special Utility District. As a director/officer of Mountain Peak, he need not disclose his interest in or abstain from voting on matters involving the City of Midlothian.

Opinion No. GA-0196

The Honorable Mike Krusee

Chairman, Committee on Transportation

Texas House of Representatives

Post Office Box 2910

Austin, Texas 78768-2910

Re: Whether Transportation Code §521.126 prohibits a private security guard from running a driver's license through a device that electronically reads driver's license information to enable the Port of Houston Authority police officers to access and use the information (RQ-0143-GA)

SUMMARY

Section 521.126 of the Transportation Code does not prohibit a private security guard from running a driver's license through a device that electronically reads driver's license information to enable the Port Authority peace officers acting in that capacity to access and use the information.

Attorney General Opinion JC-0540 (2002) is superseded in part by statute.

Opinion No. GA-0197

The Honorable Tim Curry

Tarrant County Criminal District Attorney

Justice Center

401 West Belknap

Fort Worth, Texas 76196-0201

Re: Whether an attorney who engages in certain conduct is ineligible to execute bail bonds under Occupations Code §1704.163, which exempts attorneys from Chapter 1704's general licensing requirements in certain limited circumstances (RQ-0145-GA)

SUMMARY

Occupations Code, §1704.163(a) generally permits an attorney to act as a surety for a client who the attorney represents in the criminal case without being licensed by the county bail bond board under Chapter 1704. An attorney may not act as a surety under this provision if the bail bond board has determined that the attorney has engaged in prohibited conduct under §1704.163(b). In addition, the official taking a defendant's bail bond in a particular criminal case may have cause to determine that an attorney who is not licensed under Chapter 1704 is not eligible to execute a bail bond or act as surety for the defendant under §1704.163(a) because the attorney does not represent the defendant in the criminal case.

A bail bond board may determine that an attorney is ineligible to execute a bail bond under §1704.163 if the attorney has engaged in conduct that would provide a basis for revoking or suspending the license of a licensed bondsman under §1704.252 or §1704.253. Because attorneys acting under the §1704.163 exemption are not subject to Chapter 1704's license and security requirements, a board may not disqualify such an attorney for conduct that violates a Chapter 1704 provision or board rule relating to license and security requirements.

An attorney who is not licensed under Chapter 1704 who executes a bail bond for a person who the attorney does not represent in the criminal case violates §1704.151, which is a basis for license suspension or revocation under §1704.252(1), and has therefore committed "conduct involved with that practice that would subject a bail bond surety to license suspension or revocation" under §1704.163(b). Whether an attorney represented a defendant in a particular case at the time the attorney executed the bond will depend upon the facts and is a matter for the bail bond board to determine.

Whether an attorney has remedied a violation will depend upon the disqualifying conduct. A bail bond board is authorized to determine whether an attorney has remedied a violation.

Opinion No. GA-0198

The Honorable Sonya Letson

Potter County Attorney

500 South Fillmore, Room 303

Amarillo, Texas 79101

Re: Whether a hospital district or the private entity that provides indigent care on the district's behalf may require an uninsured applicant for indigent health care, as a prerequisite to receiving the care, to obtain health insurance through the applicant's employer (RQ-0146-GA)

SUMMARY

A hospital district or the private entity that provides indigent care on the district's behalf may not require an uninsured applicant for indigent health care, as a prerequisite to receiving the care, to obtain health insurance through the applicant's employer.

For further information, please access the web site at www.oag.state.tx.us or call the Opinion Committee at (512) 463-2110.

TRD-200403778

Nancy S. Fuller

Assistant Attorney General

Office of the Attorney General

Filed: June 9, 2004