TITLE attorney-general

Opinions

Opinion No. JC-0393

The Honorable James M. Kuboviak, Brazos County Attorney, 300 East 26th Street, Suite #325, Bryan, Texas 77803

Re: Whether a defendant convicted of multiple class C misdemeanors who defaults on the fines and court costs he or she is sentenced to pay and who is therefore confined discharges the fines and court costs concurrently or consecutively, and related questions (RQ-0338-JC)

S U M M A R Y

A misdemeanant who is confined when a court orders a term of confinement to enforce the discharge of a fine or costs on a second conviction serves the confinements concurrently unless the court orders the terms to be served consecutively under article 42.08 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. See Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. arts. 42.08, 43.03(b) (Vernon Supp. 2001). On the other hand, if the misdemeanant is ordered to be confined to enforce the discharge of multiple fines or costs when he or she is not confined, the confinements are served consecutively. If fines or costs are discharged consecutively, the court's order must indicate that the confinements will run consecutively. See id. art. 42.08(a). The court's order also should contain five elements, which may be adapted to the circumstances of a confinement to enforce a default: (1) the prior conviction's trial court number; (2) the correct name of the court where the prior conviction was taken; (3) the prior conviction's date; (4) the prior conviction's term; and (5) the prior conviction's nature. See Banks v. State, 708 S.W.2d 460, 461 (Tex. Crim. App. 1986) (en banc).

A defendant convicted of multiple class C misdemeanors receives credit for time spent in confinement prior to sentencing on each of the sentences as though the time ran concurrently. See Hannington v. State, 832 S.W.2d 355, 356 (Tex. Crim. App. 1992) (en banc) (per curiam); Ex parte Bynum, 772 S.W.2d 113, 115-16 (Tex. Crim. App. 1989) (en banc) (per curiam).

Opinion No. JC-0394

The Honorable Michael A. Stafford, Harris County Attorney, 1019 Congress Avenue, 15th Floor, Houston, Texas 77002-1700

Re: Whether Harris County Hospital District may provide discounted health care to persons residing in Harris County, without regard to their immigration or legal status (RQ-0341-JC)

S U M M A R Y

The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 provides in 8 U.S.C. §1621 that undocumented aliens are ineligible for state and local public benefits, with certain exceptions. Under this Act, a state may provide that an alien not lawfully present in the United States is eligible for any state or local benefit only through the enactment of a state law after August 22, 1996, which affirmatively provides for such eligibility. No Texas statute adopted before or after August 22, 1996, affirmatively provides that residents of hospital districts are eligible for public benefits without regard to immigration status. The Act therefore prohibits the Harris County Hospital District from providing free or discounted nonemergency health care to undocumented aliens, even if they reside within the district's boundaries.

Opinion No. JC-0395

The Honorable Sky Sudderth, District Attorney, 35th Judicial District, Brown County Courthouse, Brownwood, Texas 76801

Re: Whether a district attorney may, by contract, bind the use of county funds, and related question (RQ-0347-JC)

S U M M A R Y

A district attorney may not enter into a multiyear contract for office equipment that requires the expenditure of county funds and that does not permit the county to terminate the contract at the end of each year. Only a county commissioners court may execute a contract that binds the county. Additionally, a multiyear contract that does not either provide for levying and collecting a tax to pay the interest and to create a sinking fund or permit the county to terminate the contract at the end of each year violates article XI, section 7 of the Texas Constitution.

Opinion No. JC-0396

Mr. Thomas A. Davis, Jr., Director, Texas Department of Public Safety, 5805 North Lamar Boulevard, Box 4087, Austin, Texas 78773-0001

Re: Whether a person who has been pardoned for a felony conviction is subject to section 46.04 of the Penal Code, and related questions (RQ-0349-JC)

S U M M A R Y

For the purposes of section 46.04 of the Penal Code, which limits a convicted felon's authority to possess a firearm, the term "convicted" denotes a felon who has been proven guilty. See Tex. Pen. Code Ann. §46.04(a) (Vernon 1994). Nevertheless, a felon who has received a full pardon is not subject to the disability imposed by section 46.04. Accordingly, a pardoned felon may possess a firearm without violating section 46.04.

A convicted felon whose verdict has been set aside or who has been permitted to withdraw a guilty plea under article 42.12, section 20 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is not subject to section 46.04 of the Penal Code because the statute releases such felon from "all penalties and disabilities resulting from the offense." Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 42.12, § 20(a) (Vernon Supp. 2001); see also Cuellar v. State, 40 S.W.3d 724, 728 (Tex. App. San Antonio 2001, no pet.).

Opinion No. JC-0397

The Honorable Russell W. Malm, Midland County Attorney, 200 West Wall Street, Suite 104, Midland, Texas 79701

Re: Whether a county may pay the employer's share of employment taxes on state "supplemental salary compensation" paid to a county judge pursuant to section 26.006(a) of the Government Code from the state-provided funds, and related questions (RQ-0356-JC)

S U M M A R Y

A county may not pay the employer's share of employment taxes on a county judge's state salary supplement from the monies provided by the state. See Tex. Gov't Code Ann. § 26.006 (Vernon Supp. 2001) (providing that certain county judges receive an annual salary supplement of $10,000 from the state).

A district attorney may not require the county commissioners court to expend county funds to pay the employer's share of employment taxes on the assistant district attorney salary supplements paid from the district attorney's "hot-check fund" and from monies the district attorney receives from the state under section 46.004 of the Government Code. The hot-check and section 46.004 monies are not dedicated solely for salary supplements, and their statutes do not vest the district attorney with control over county funds. See id. § 46.004 (providing that "[e]ach state prosecutor is entitled to receive not less than $22,500 a year from the state to be used by the prosecutor to help defray the salaries and expenses of the office"); Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 102.007(f) (Vernon Supp. 2001) (dedicating certain hot-check fees to "defray the salaries and expenses of the prosecutor's office"). The district attorney is responsible for assuring compliance with federal law with respect to employment taxes on the salary supplements.

Opinion No. JC-0398

The Honorable Royce West, Chair, Jurisprudence Committee, Texas State Senate, P.O. Box 12068 Austin, Texas 78711-2068

Re: Whether section 25.092 of the Education Code, which relates to minimum attendance for class credit, is applicable to a student who is exempt from compulsory attendance under section 25.086 (RQ-0360-JC)

S U M M A R Y

The requirement of section 25.092 of the Education Code that a student must attend class for ninety percent of the days on which the class is offered in order to receive credit for the class is applicable without regard to whether the student is exempt from compulsory attendance under section 25.086.

Section 25.092 does, however, make allowance for extenuating circumstances. Students who are in attendance fewer than the number of days required may petition for class credit before an attendance committee appointed by the board of trustees of a school district. See Tex. Educ. Code Ann. §25.092(b) (Vernon Supp. 2001). A student may appeal an adverse ruling of the attendance committee to the board of trustees and ultimately to a district court. See id. § 25.092(d).

For further information, please call (512) 463-2110.

TRD-200104145

Susan D. Gusky

Assistant Attorney General

Office of the Attorney General

Filed: July 18, 2001


Request for Opinions

RQ-0400-JC

The Honorable Rick Berry, Harrison County Criminal District Attorney, P.O. Box 776, Marshall, Texas 75671

Re: Authority of the Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission to promulgate a rule that requires perpetual maintenance contracts for certain on-site sewage facilities (Request No. 0400-JC)

Briefs requested by August 16, 2001

RQ-0401-JC

The Honorable Tim Cone, Upshur County Criminal District Attorney, 405 North Titus Street, Gilmer, Texas 75644

Re: Whether members of a local governmental body may present a gift of golf towels to members of the legislature (Request No. 0401-JC)

Briefs requested by August 16, 2001

RQ-0402-JC

The Honorable Tim Cone, Upshur County Criminal District Attorney, 405 North Titus Street, Gilmer, Texas 75644

Re: Whether a county commissioner may be reimbursed for expenses incurred in the official use of his personal vehicle (Request No. 0402-JC)

Briefs requested by August 16, 2001

For further information, please call (512) 463-2110.

TRD-200104144

Susan D. Gusky

Assistant Attorney General

Office of the Attorney General

Filed: July 18, 2001