focus on bail bond forfeitures - tmcec :: home recorder/2004/nl_0304… · and court security...

©2004 Texas Municipal Courts Education Center, Austin. Funded by a grant from the Court of Criminal Appeals.

Volume 13 MARCH 2004 No. 4

Interlocal Agreements for Jail ServiceDon’t Get Locked into a Bad Contract

By Cary L. Bovey, Attorney at Law, Bovey, Akers & Bojorquez, L.L.P., Austin

Jail Service continued on page 4

Bond Forfeitures continued on page 6

Focus on ... Bail Bond ForfeituresBy David L. Finney, Assistant Criminal District Attorney, Denton County

I N S I D E T H I S I S S U E

Articles:Interlocal Agreements for Jail Serviceby Cary L. Bovey ................................... 1

Focus on ... Bail Bond Forfeituresby David L. Finney ............................... 1Serving the Community while AvoidingGetting Served by Ryan Kellus Turner .11

Court Budget Planning during LeanTimes by Greg Toomey ....................... 17Columns:Around the State ................................... 2Clerk’s Corner ...................................... 20Collections Corner .............................. 22Court Security ...................................... 24From the Center .................................. 19From the General Counsel .................. 3Resources for Your Court ................. 16

For many years, Texas localgovernments have cooperated witheach other in the delivery of services tothe public and in the performance ofgovernmental functions. As costscontinue to rise and the demand forservices and governmental functionsincrease, cities and counties have foundit beneficial in many instances to enterinto interlocal contracts in an attemptto address the growth in costs andsurging demand for services.

The provision of jail services is an areain which local governments have

benefited from cooperation with eachother. Texas municipalities havecommonly contracted with the countyto provide space in the county jail tohouse inmates who would normally beincarcerated in the municipal jail. Citiesenter into these arrangements for avariety of reasons, but are more oftenmotivated by the desire to save moneyrather than incur the costs necessary toconstruct and operate a municipal jail.For smaller cities, the issue can be oneof necessity, because many smallermunicipalities simply do not have the

funds required to build and run a cityjail.

Some cities have an informal“arrangement” with the county tohouse municipal inmates, believing it isnot necessary to memorialize the“arrangement” into a formal writtenagreement. This is not advisablebecause unforeseen disputes may arise.Contracts are written to address theunforeseen disputes and situationsneither party anticipates will or desiresto occur, therefore, it is necessary to

Texas municipal courts have authority tocollect bail bond forfeitures. While theprocedures are the same as those employed inthe courts in counties, the players are notalways the same. Article 4.14(e), Code ofCriminal Procedure, gives authority andjurisdiction over bail bond forfeiture prosecu-tions to the municipal court in all cases wherethe court has jurisdiction of the criminal casein which the bond was given. The city attorneyor deputy city attorney, acting as the municipalprosecutor, prosecutes municipal bond forfei-tures. Article 45.201, Code of CriminalProcedure, provides that the municipalprosecutor, rather than the local district orcounty attorney, represents the State in

municipal court. Duties performed by thecounty sheriff—such as the service of pro-cess—are performed by a peace officer ormarshal of the municipality under Art.45.202, C.C.P. All of the reasons that acounty should prosecute bond forfeitures—revenue, respect, and accountability—areequally valid in Texas municipalities.

No matter if your city is rural or big-city, youcan prosecute bail bond forfeitures. Here is aprimer on getting started.

While the prosecution of bail bondforfeitures is not particularly difficult, it

Municipal Court Recorder March 2004

Texas Municipal CourtsEducation Center

1609 Shoal Creek Boulevard, Suite 302Austin, Texas 78701

512/320-8274 or 800/252-3718Fax: 512/435-6118

Web site: www.tmcec.com

FY04TMCA Officers

President: Sharon Hatten, MidlandPresident-Elect: Dan Francis, Robinson1st V.P.: Edwin L. Presley, Benbrook2nd V.P.: Daniel J. Simms, HoustonSecretary: Luane Turvey, WebsterTreasurer: Robert Richter, Missouri CityPast-President: Joe Pirtle, Seabrook

Directors

Jan Matthews, Lubbock . Ninfa Mares,Fort Worth . Vicki Gerhardt, New London. Robin Smith, Midland . David Perkins,New Braunfels . Miles Whittington,Kemah . George Bill Robinson, Yorktown. Robin Ramsay, Denton . Robert Barfield,Pasadena . Walter Dick Kettler, BeverlyHills

Staff

• Hope Lochridge, Executive Director• W. Clay Abbott, General Counsel• Ryan Kellus Turner, Program Attorney &

Deputy Counsel• Margaret Robbins, Program Director• Jo Dale Bearden, Program Coordinator• Margaret Danforth, Admin. Director• Patricia Russo, Program Assistant II• Rey Guzman, Multimedia Specialist• Beatrice Flores, Registration Coordinator• Lidia Ball, Research Assistant• Courtney Barajas, Publications Coordi-

nator/Admin. Assistant

Published by the Texas Municipal CourtsEducation Center through a grant from theTexas Court of Criminal Appeals. Sub-scriptions are free to all municipal judges,clerks, prosecutors, and support personnelemployed by the municipal court. Othersmay purchase an annual subscription for$50.

Articles and items of interest not otherwisecopyrighted may be reprinted with attribu-tion as follows: “Reprinted from theMunicipal Court Recorder with permissionof the Texas Municipal Courts EducationCenter.”

The views expressed are solely those of theauthors and are not those of the TMCABoard of Directors or the staff of TMCEC.

AROUND THE STATE

TMA Annual Meeting &Conference in Austin in April

The Texas Marshal Association (TMA) Annual Conference & Training Seminarwill be held April 4-8, 2004 at the Lakeway Inn, located just west of Austin onLake Travis. TMA is a non-profit organization that provides law enforcementand court security training to its members on a state level. Membership consistsof city marshals, warrant officers, bailiffs, and court personnel from acrossTexas.

In addition to the Association’s annual business meeting, a 16-hour course onCourt Security will be offered that includes many pertinent issues, such as physicalsecurity, bailiff duties, courthouse safety measures, weapons detection,evacuation, bomb threats, searches, security during trial, first respondernegotiations, verbal control, negotiations techniques, and hostage survival. Onthe third day, Strategies for Living: A Life-Balancing Workshop will be offered,followed by a presentation by a retired Secret Service agent on the Kennedyassassination. The conference closes on Thursday morning with an optionalfour-hour Identify Theft course. Fun evening activities are planned, including adinner cruise.

The registration fee is $250 for members and $310 for non-members if aparticipant registers before March 15, 2004. After that date, there is a $50 latefee. Single rooms are available for $80 each, plus tax. The housing deadline isMarch 4, 2004. Contact the hotel directly (800/525-3929) and ask for the TMAgovernment rate. For additional information about the conference or to register,contact Ron White, TMA President at 817/430-0936.

TMCEC works closely with TMA in planning its bailiff/warrant officerprograms. TMA provides excellent opportunities for members to network withother members throughout the state. Some of the advantages of being able tonetwork with TMA members are the sharing of ideas and the pooling ofresources. The Association sponsors local warrant roundups and assists itsmembers in cooperative efforts. For more information, visit the TMA website atwww.texasmarshals.org.

GCAT ConferenceThe Government Collectors Association of Texas (GCAT) conference on finesand fees collection will be held in Galveston June 2-4, 2004 at the San LuisResort. Call 512/936-7557 for more information. The agenda will be designedfor judges and court support personnel from all trial courts in Texas. Municipaljudges and court support personnel who have attended in the past have highlyrated the program for its practical, yet innovative approach to increasing courtcollection rates.

March 2004 Municipal Court Recorder

FROM THE GENERAL COUNSEL W. Clay Abbott

Article 15.18 Out-of-CountyPleas (or Random Acts ofJudicial Discretion)

Despite the fact that it has been on thebooks for more than two years, noprovision in the law has caused moreconsternation and grief than Article15.18, Code of Criminal Procedure.This provision gives any magistratejurisdiction and judicial authority overany fine-only criminal case if theoffender is brought before them on awarrant issued from a court in anothercounty. The judicial authority ispredicated on a written plea of guilty ornolo. The magistrate has the judicialauthority to accept the plea, set a fine,determine cost, give jail credit,determine indigency, accept payment,and to discharge the defendant. Inpractical terms this means that, withoutnotice and on one case at a time, avisiting judge blows in with differentforms, procedures, and legalinterpretations and resolves the case ofone of the court’s most irritatingdefendants. Big surprise: This can causesome turmoil.

In all fairness, the legislative change wasmade to help jail crowding and reduceprisoner transportation cost. Theprocedure has not been legallychallenged, nor would I expect it to be.Attempts at legislative correction havefallen in the “guess it didn’t pass” stack.So we are stuck with it. What follows ismy practical advice for taking 15.18pleas and for handling 15.18 pleas—even ones that have been done“wrong.”

The first suggestion I make is that, if amagistrate plans on taking a 15.18 plea,a telephone call would be nice. Thestatute imposes no obligation upon the

magistrate to notify the court, butcommon courtesy and minimal socialawareness seem to justify a call. Manymagistrates work nights and weekends.This makes a call before taking a pleadifficult, but very few courts operatewithout an answering machine. I don’tknow of any police department thatdoes not have someone answeringtelephone calls, even in those lonely,quiet early morning hours. Courtsissuing warrants out-of-county may alsoconsider putting a telephone numberand request for notification with thewarrant. Who knows, it might work.

Secondly, complete a judgment! Nojudge should be finding people guilty,collecting fines, or incarceratingdefendants without a written judgment.If a magistrate decides to take on therole of a judge with jurisdiction,nothing in Art. 15.18 relieves him orher of any ethical, constitutional, orprocedural duty imposed on the court.A completed judgment would alsoresolve the great majority of theproblems I have received calls on fromaround the state. A failure to prepareand sign a judgment is not only thefailure of the jail staff, it is misconductby the magistrate. Very bluntly, amagistrate shouldn’t act like the judge ifnot competent to handle it; thatincludes the paperwork.

Finally, Art. 15.18(b), C.C.P., specificallyrequires that an out-of-countymagistrate send the written plea,judgment, and any fine or cost collectedto the court with jurisdiction before the11th business day after the plea. Failureto perform this duty violates the statuteand, presumptively, the magistrate’sethical duties. The magistrate shouldnever delay prompt remittance based

on this provision since the defendantcould be rearrested, contacted, orotherwise disadvantaged. Time is of theessence when dealing with warrants andjudgments both.

The court receiving notice that it hasbeen the recipient of a “random act ofjudicial discretion” under Art. 15.18also has several obligations. Primarilythe court has a duty to promptly accept,record, account, and credit the judicialorder. The clerk should make sure thejudge is notified. The statutes do notprovide any means or authority for thesitting judge to modify, amend, orcorrect the magistrate’s orders. Thereceiving court should reportconvictions, track discharges orpayment of the fine and cost, andfollow up on orders granting DSC orgranting deferred disposition. Unpaidor undischarged fine amounts shouldbe collectable, just like fines imposed bythe sitting judge.

Most importantly, warrants and holdsshould be lifted immediately. Once thejudgment is rendered, there is nofurther justification for arrest under thenow fully executed judgment. Failure todo this or to create a procedure to dothis could result in clear violations of adefendant’s constitutional right and theincumbent litigation and liability.

The greatest problem with this schemeis what to do if there are errors,omissions, or general blunders in theout-of-county magistrate’s orders. Whatmay the court with original jurisdictiondo? The answer is that the courtprobably has no recourse. As notedearlier, the out-of-county magistratemay assume jurisdiction unilaterallywithout notice or consent. The out-of-county magistrate has the same


Jail Services continued from page 1

address as many issues and scenariosas possible when preparing aninterlocal contract. In doing so, thereis less room for speculation regardingthe parties’ intentions.

Legal Background and Authorityfor Interlocal Contracting

The Texas Legislature, recognizing thevalue of cooperation between localgovernments, began over 100 yearsago enacting statutes authorizingvarious types of endeavors betweenlocal governments. These statutes,

authority as a judge in the court. Thepresiding local judge is given no specialreview or modification powers. Thedefendant is certainly entitled to rely onthe orders of the out-of-countymagistrate. Unfortunately, the onlyremedy is ordering a new trial (whichwould be procedurally impossible andlikely barred by the passing of time) orappeal by the State (equally difficult andalso likely barred by the passage oftime).

My final advice is the kind your motherwould give. Be courteous, prompt, andpatient.

A Retraction of Sorts

In the December 2003 Municipal CourtRecorder, Ryan Kellus Turnersummarized a number of AttorneyGeneral Opinions from the previousyear. One of those opinions was JC-0544, issued August 4, 2002. Theopinion stated that general-lawmunicipalities could not reassign to anyother employee budget duties assignedto the mayor by Sec. 102.001, LocalGovernment Code. The onlyexception—the opinion note—waswhen the municipality adopted a citymanager scheme under Chapter 25,Local Government Code.

At the request of both the TexasMunicipal League and the Texas

Attorney General’s Office, our reviewof that Opinion needs to be clarified.First, the Opinion says exactly whatRyan said it did. Second, the Legislaturemet since the Opinion was issued andthe law changed.

The 78th Texas Legislature passed SB734 on May 28, 2003, which amendedChapter 25 of the Local GovernmentCode. Specifically, general-lawmunicipalities were given broadauthority to prescribe the powers andduties of municipal employees. Thislegislative enactment effectively negatesJC-0544. I hope this oversight did notcause any problems.

Other AG Opinions

On November 25, 2003, the AttorneyGeneral issued Open Records DecisionNo. 680. That opinion concerned apolice department giving a schooldistrict information about Minor inPossession charges against personsunder age 17. Citing Sec. 58.007(c),Family Code, the opinion held that suchrecords were confidential under thatsection. Sec. 58.007(c), F.C., concernslaw enforcement releasing juvenileoffender information. The AttorneyGeneral reasoned that, since themunicipal or justice court could transferthe case to the juvenile court, theinformation was “juvenile justiceinformation” covered by the statute.

It is important to note that the Opinionand the statutes it interprets involveonly law enforcement agencies and theirobligations. But, the Opinion points toa bit of a gap in municipal courtobligations concerning juvenileoffenders’ records. Family Codeprovisions requiring juvenile courts tokeep hearings and records confidentialdo not control municipal courts.Municipal courts prosecute juvenileoffenders for criminal conduct, notdelinquent conduct. What happens if amunicipal court waives jurisdiction andtransfers a case to the juvenile court—either in its discretion or as amandatory third violation—pursuant toSec. 51.008, F.C? If the logic of OpenRecords Decision No. 680 holds true,the information held by the municipalcourt is now confidential and subject toconfidentiality rules in the Family Code.This provides special challenges to theclerk and court. Records not transferredare open to inspection under thecommon law principle of open courts,while transferred cases must beprotected as a matter of the juvenile’srights under the Family Code. Thismeans communication and thoroughrecordkeeping are a must to avoid oneviolation or another. A full copy of theOpinion can be accessed through theTMCEC web site at www.tmcec.com.

however, were very narrowly writtenand often only applied to certain typesof local governments and weretherefore limited in their usefulness.

In 1971, as authorized by Article III,Section 64(b) of the TexasConstitution, the Texas Legislatureenacted the Interlocal CooperationAct (Article 4413(32c), Tex. Rev. Civ.Stat., and hereinafter referred to as the“Act”) which is now codified inChapter 791 of the TexasGovernment Code. The Actauthorizes municipalities to contractwith other governmental agencies,

including state agencies, specialdistricts, counties, municipalities, andother political subdivisions. The Actauthorizes cities to contract with otherlocal governments to performgovernmental and administrativefunctions and services such as policeprotection and detention services, fireprotection, streets, roads, anddrainage, public health and welfare,parks and recreation, library andmuseum services, record centerservices, waste disposal, planning,engineering, public funds investment,tax assessment and collection,personnel services, purchasing,

B


be obligated beyond the current fiscalyear except in specific circumstances,such as the issuance of bonds.

The Act also allows the rules,regulations, and ordinances of anyparty to an interlocal contract to beused to govern contractualperformance as the parties may agree.

Finally, the Act authorizes thecontracting parties to create a separateagency or designate an existingpolitical subdivision to supervise theperformance of an interlocal contract.The Act further provides that such anagency or political subdivision mayemploy personnel, performadministrative activities, and provideadministrative services necessary tocarry out the terms of the interlocalcontract.

Interlocal Contracts for Jail Services

In addition to the provisions that arerequired by the Interlocal CooperationAct to be in an interlocal contract,there are issues particular to jailservices that should be addressed in anagreement.

The agreement should address theamount of compensation to be paidfor the housing of inmates. As notedabove, payments pursuant to aninterlocal contract must be in anamount that fairly compensates theparty performing the service under thecontract. Additionally, the interlocalcontract should address the basis onwhich payment will be made (e.g.,charge for each inmate per day, yearlylump sum, monthly or quarterly flatfee, actual expenses incurred, capacityof jail required by city, or some otherbasis).

An interlocal contract should allocateresponsibility for the costs of medicalcare of the city inmates housed in thecounty jail. Generally, from a city’sperspective, when an inmate isaccepted into the jail by the county, thecounty is responsible for meeting thebasic human needs and medical care

of the inmate. This is tempered by thefact that a county jail is under no dutyto accept persons arrested for violatinga purely local ordinance. However, thecounty jail does have a duty to providefor the needs of inmates housed in thecounty jail for violating ordinancesimplementing state law (e.g., localordinance implementing state trafficlaws). [Attorney General Opinion No.MW-52 (1979); Attorney GeneralOpinion No. JM-1009 (1989)]

Therefore, as a compromise, cities mayagree to bear the costs of medical careof the city inmates that are chargedwith violation of city ordinances andClass C state law misdemeanors thatare within the jurisdiction of themunicipal court. As a practical matter,however, the custom of manymunicipal judges is to release cityinmates prior to any significantmedical care costs being incurred bythe city.

Other issues specific to jail servicesthat the parties may want to address inthe interlocal agreement include theterms and conditions regarding thecounty’s acceptance of inmates uponpresentation by city, guaranteednumber of city inmates that will beaccepted by the county, responsibilityfor the transportation of city prisonersto municipal court, conditions ofrelease of city prisoners, etc.

Other Provisions Applicable to AllInterlocal Contracts

Finally, there are many standardcontractual provisions that the partiesshould consider for inclusion in aninterlocal contract. These types ofprovisions include, but are not limitedto, definition of terms used in thecontract, nature of the services to beperformed, the legal authority underwhich the contract is authorized,reference to any standards to beobserved or applicable federal, state, orlocal laws and regulations, indemnityand liability allocation between theparties, amount and basis of

records management services, dataprocessing, warehousing, equipmentrepair, printing, and othergovernmental and administrativefunctions in which the contractingparties are mutually interested.

General-law municipalities, because oftheir restricted powers, are limited tocontracting with other governmentalentities as authorized under the Act orother law. Home-rule cities, pursuant totheir broad home-rule authority, maycontract in any manner not prohibitedby law. The Act, however, does notgrant any additional governmentalpowers and does not affect the basicstructure and organization ofgovernment in Texas. The Act alsoprovides that a person acting under aninterlocal contract does not, because ofany provision of the interlocal contract,hold more than one civil office ofemolument or more than one office ofhonor, trust, or profit.

An interlocal contract must beauthorized by the governing body ofeach party to the contract.

The Act also requires certain matters tobe addressed in an interlocal agreement,including the purpose, terms, rights, andduties of the contracting parties. Theinterlocal contract must also specify thateach party paying for the performanceof governmental functions or servicesmust make those payments fromcurrent revenues available to the payingparty.

Payments pursuant to an interlocalcontract must be in an amount thatfairly compensates the party performingthe service under the contract.

Additionally, the Act provides that aninterlocal contract may be renewedannually. In the case of a multi-yearcontract, it is necessary to renew orapprove the contract on an annual basisbecause of the language in the Actrequiring payment only from currentfunds. This requirement is in line withthe general rule that revenues may not


Bond Forfeitures continued from page 1

compensation, procedure for payments, administrative control and responsibility for the contract, review of adjustment ofcharges/compensation, force majeure, term of contract, requirement that amendments to contract be written, procedurefor termination, assignability of contract, non-discrimination provision, severability clause, procedure for resolution ofdisputes between the parties, venue for any litigation arising under the contract, procedure for written notice to other party,and the recovery of attorney fees to the prevailing party in the event of any claim or lawsuit arising out of the contract.

Conclusion

Cities and other local governments have successfully utilized interlocal contracting as a tool for more efficient use of localresources. Care should be taken in the drafting of an interlocal agreement to ensure that the contract contains theprovisions required by the Interlocal Cooperation Act. Additionally, it is important to address the specific issues that areraised by the type of governmental functions or services to be provided for under the interlocal agreement. It is my hopethat you are able to use the information contained herein to craft an effective interlocal agreement regarding the provisionsof jail services.__________________Cary L. Bovey is a founding partner of the law firm Bovey, Akers & Bojorquez, L.L.P. located in Austin, Texas. Bovey, Akers & Bojorquez, L.L.P. isexclusively dedicated to representing municipalities throughout Texas.

can be both time and paper intensive.Large cities have sufficient resourcesand personnel to engage in acomprehensive bail bond operation, butthe majority of Texas cities are limitedin both the time and the staff availableto prosecute bail bond forfeiture cases.

Bond forfeitures are criminal in nature,but follow the Rules of CivilProcedure.1 In essence, the State issuing to collect the debt created by thecontract (bond) for the appearance orreturn of the principal (defendant)which the bondsman has guaranteed(surety). The ever-present conflict is thefinal value of the return, or failure toreturn, the principal to the State’scustody.

Since the last federal census, a numberof cities have struggled through thecreation of bail bond boards and thechanges they bring to the bail bondcommunity. Counties with populationsof 110,000 or more have mandatorybail bond boards.2 Counties withpopulations of less than 110,000 maycreate a discretionary bail bond boardwith the same rights and powers of amandatory board.3 A discretionary bailbond board is created through themajority vote of the persons whowould serve on the bail bond board.4

The advantage to having a board isgreater regulation of the bondsmen,diversification of the duties to regulatebondsmen,5 and a few legal advantagesin the prosecution of bail bondforfeiture cases.6 The disadvantagesinclude more meetings for electedofficials, more people involved in theregulation of bondsmen, and a greaterbureaucracy overall.

Each city without a bail bond boardshould consider whether the city wouldbenefit from the creation of a board orwhether a board would really matter inthe operation or prosecution of city orcounty business. Once thisdetermination has been made, the cityshould proceed accordingly. A bail bondboard must be created by a county andmay not be created solely by amunicipality.

Philosophy and Education

If your city has never prosecuted bailbond forfeitures and you want to startprosecuting them, one of your first taskswill be to develop a philosophy ofprosecution. What is a philosophy ofprosecution? The city prosecutor mustdetermine what goals he or she has forbail bond forfeiture prosecutions, whenand under what circumstances cases

should be settled or should be tried,and what ranges of settlement shouldbe available.

Once you have determined andarticulated your philosophy and goals,you must begin to educate the players inyour bail bond game. There is no rightplace to begin the education processbut, logically, it begins with the self-education of the prosecutor’s office andthe development of a prosecutionstrategy and proceeds through thewarrant officer, clerk, and court. Theprimary purpose of the bail bondforfeiture program, of course, is toreturn the defendant (principal) tocustody, allowing the criminalprosecution to continue. The by-product of the program is income forthe general fund of the city.7 The citycouncil will appreciate the by-productfar more than the purpose.

Each legislative session, the bondsmenand their lobbyists portray the bail bondprosecutors as a group of greedyiconoclasts and complain to theLegislature that there is little or noconsistency in the prosecution of bailbond cases. One of our goals in theprosecution of bail bond forfeituresshould be the consistent application ofthe law. Consistency in applying the law,

B


the same manner as any other civilsuit.13 Please note, however, that a bondforfeiture requires “magic words” inthe citation.14 The magic words are, “...to show cause why the judgment offorfeiture should not be made final.”Failure to include the magic words maybe fatal to the citation. You may need tospend some time with the clerk toreview the service of citation in bondforfeiture cases as a part of youreducation process.

Service of Citation

One of the biggest problems in bondforfeiture cases is obtaining jurisdictionover the proper parties. Property bailbond companies have individual ownerswho should be served citation in theirindividual capacities. For example, ifSam Spade owns Ace Bail Company,the proper party in a bond forfeiture isSam Spade d/b/a Ace Bail Company.Ace Bail Company is merely anassumed or trade name (“d/b/a”) andis not an entity with the full capacity tosue or be sued.15 Sam Spade is the realparty in interest, and you should servehim with citation for a bail bondforfeiture. A judgment against Ace BailBonds may not be enforceable againstSam Spade and may be uncollectibleagainst Ace.

Unlike an assumed name company, acorporation is an entity having thecapacity to sue or be sued, but acorporation may not be a bailbondsman.16 However, there is anexception to that general corporate rule:Insurance companies that haveobtained authority from the TexasDepartment of Insurance may writesurety bonds.17 An insurance companywithout authority from the Departmentof Insurance may not write bailbonds.18 Insurance companies havelocal bail bond agents who run the day-to-day bail bond business of theinsurance company, but the agents haveno liability to the State for the bonds.You must serve citation on theinsurance company in a bond forfeiture,

not on the local agent. Although youmay deal with local agent Bill Bond, heis merely the agent for Acme SuretyCompany. He does business locallyunder the trade name of Easy Bail. Toobtain proper jurisdiction for a bailbond forfeiture for Easy Bail, you mustserve citation on Acme SuretyCompany. It is likely that Acme willhave a registered agent for service ofprocess (citation). If you have a bailbond board, that registered agentshould be on file with the board. If youdo not have a board, you may contactthe Office of the Secretary of State andobtain the name and address of Acme’sregistered agent.

In Denton County, for example, Acmewould be served with citation asfollows: Acme Surety Company, BillBond, Agent, d/b/a Easy Bail, by andthrough its registered agent, C.T.Corporation, c/o Jean Phelps, 350North St. Paul Street, Dallas, Texas75201. The use of local agents, tradenames, and registered agents oftenallows insurance companies to avoidliability on bail bonds. You may havebond forfeiture citations served inperson, by certified mail, or even bypublication.19 The proper party for theservice of citation is the same in bailbond forfeiture cases regardless ofwhether you have a bail bond board ornot.

Trial and Defenses

After service of the citation, theprincipal and surety have until the firstMonday after the expiration of 20 daysfrom the date of service to file ananswer.20 If either or both fail toanswer in a timely manner, the Statemay take a default judgment againsteither or both, depending upon thefacts of service and the filing of ananswer. A default judgment againstonly one party is interlocutory unlessthe active parties and defaulted partiesare severed. The severed defaultbecomes final after 30 days, presumingthat a motion for new trial or a notice

however, still leaves considerablediscretion for local philosophies on theprosecution or settlement of cases.

Prosecution

The prosecution of a bail bond casebegins with the setting and properexecution of the bail bond. The court,sheriff ’s office, or detention facilityaccepts bail bonds in both board andnon-board counties. Be sure that theagencies who accept bail bonds checkeach bond carefully to be certain thatthe bond meets all the requirements ofa bail bond,8 is properly signed, isreadable, and has sufficient informationto identify and serve citation on boththe principal and the bondsman(surety). If the surety is an insurancecompany, the person accepting thebond also needs to be sure that a powerof attorney is attached to each bond.9Remember also that the magistrate mayset the amount of the bond, but maynot set the type of the bond.10 It is alsogood to remember that the bond maybe used only to secure the appearanceof the principal and not for fines, fees,and costs. [Id. and Trammel v. State, 529S.W.2d 528 (Tex. Crim. App. 1975);McConathy v. State, 528 S.W.2d 594 (Tex.Crim. App. 1975); and Grantham v. State,408 S.W.2d 235 (Tex. Crim. App. 1966)]It is possible to use a cash bond forfines, fees, and costs, however, youmust have the express consent of thedefendant to use the cash bond in sucha manner.

Once the principal has failed to appearin court, the prosecutor should presenta judgment nisi to the judge of thecourt where the failure to appearoccurred. While the judge is notrequired to sign the judgment nisi onthe same day as the principal’s failure toappear, the judge should sign it as soonthereafter as is practical.11 The judgmentnisi is the basis of the State’s case forforfeiture and becomes the State’spetition.12 The judgment nisi, a copy ofthe bond, and the citation should beserved upon the principal and surety in


of appeal is not filed. If an answer isfiled, the answering party is entitled to45 days notice of the trial date andmay have a jury trial, if requestedproperly.21

At trial, the State has the initial burdenof proof. The State may, however, beable to submit a wholly documentarycase if neither the principal nor thesurety deny the execution of the bondin a sworn pleading. The State’s casemust include the bond and judgmentnisi.22 It has been agreed, generally, thata court may take judicial notice of thejudgment nisi and the bond.23 Thebetter practice is to admit certifiedcopies of the bond, judgment nisi, andcertificate of call, if available, underTexas Rule of Evidence 902.24 Afterthe court admits the State’s documents,the State will usually rest; once theprima facie case has been established,the burden shifts to the principal andsurety to show why the forfeitureshould not be made final.25 Before youspring this procedure on an unwaryjudge at trial, you may wish to spendsome time with the judge reviewingthe Code of Criminal ProcedureChapters 17 and 22. The shifting ofthe burden and a wholly documentarycase are somewhat rare for the State.Your duty to educate on bail bondissues and their idiosyncrasies extendseven to the judiciary.

The majority of the trial on the meritsof a bond forfeiture consists of theprincipal, who rarely appears, or thesurety attempting to explain to thecourt (read that “whine”) why it isunfair to take any of the bond, muchless all of it, and to assess the costs ofcourt. Every imaginable excuse will beproffered. Fortunately, only statutoryexcuses (defenses) will suffice.26 Thereare only five primary, statutorydefenses: (1) The bond is, for anycause, not a valid undertaking; (2) Thedeath of the principal before the timeof appearance (forfeiture); (3) TheState’s failure to present an indictmentor information at the first term of the

court after the principal is admitted tobail (this is rarely used); (4) Thesickness of the principal or someuncontrollable circumstance preventedthe principal’s appearance in court(through no fault of the principal); and(5) The incarceration of the principalin any jurisdiction in the UnitedStates.27 Surprisingly, the lack of actualnotice of the hearing, trial, or anyother appearance is not a defense.28

Unless the principal or surety canprovide one of these defenses or canconvince a judge that his or her storyfalls within the statutory guidelines, theState must prevail.

If the bondsman or the principalelects to challenge the bond as not avalid undertaking, he or she will likelydo so at the final hearing.Unfortunately, such a challenge is nottimely.29 An excuse for the principal’sfailure to appear may exonerate boththe principal and the surety, but theexcuse must not only be anuncontrollable circumstance, it mustbe through no fault of the principal.30

Interestingly, incarceration elsewhere atthe time of appearance can be adefense.31 In the case of amisdemeanor, the 78th Legislatureadded Art. 22.13(5)(A), C.C.P., anothercause to exonerate a surety or principalon a bond. This provision constitutesnot so much a defense as a limitationof liability. In the case of amisdemeanor, the incarceration of theprincipal in any jurisdiction in theUnited States within 180 days after theprincipal’s failure to appear willexonerate the surety and principal. Ifthe court remits bond amounts underthis provision, the court must retaininterest.

Surrender of Principals

Two other points argued as a defenseare the Affidavits of Surety toSurrender Principal (“ASSP”)32 andAffidavits of Incarceration.33 The merefiling of an ASSP is not a defense.34

The ASSP is a contingent release of

partial liability35 that only becomes adefense when a judge refuses, withoutlegal reason, to sign the timely filedASSP.36 By signing the ASSP, a judgedirects the clerk to issue a warrant forthe principal, which is the only legalmeans by which the bondsman canretrieve a principal. The ASSP limitsthe bondsman’s liability to costs ofcourt and rearrest fees once theprincipal has been returned to custody.If the principal is not returned tocustody, the bondsman remains fullyliable on the bond and the court maynot hold the bondsman to lessaccountability absent a settlement.37

The Affidavit of Incarceration allowsthe release of the bondsman withoutthe intervention of a court or theprosecuting attorney.38 If thebondsman actually surrenders theprincipal to the sheriff beforeforfeiture or submits an affidavit to thesheriff stating that the principal isincarcerated in federal custody, in thecustody of any state, or in the custodyof any county of this state, then thebondsman may be relieved of hisundertaking.39 This provision originallycontemplated the principal’s actualdelivery to the sheriff, but thesubsequent verification languagelessened the surety’s burden. Thebondsman is not automaticallyabsolved of liability but is releasedafter the sheriff ’s verification of theincarceration.40 Unlike the ASSP, theAffidavit of Incarceration is acomplete release.

Remittitur

Another area of confusion inprosecuting bail bond forfeitures is theissue of remittitur. Remittitur is theprocess by which a verdict isdiminished by subtraction.41 Both theCode of Criminal Procedure and theold Bail Bond Act provided forremittitur in bail bond cases, and thebondsmen will tell a court that they areabsolutely entitled to a refund.42 TheBail Bond Code that replaced the old


Act, however, does not contain aprovision for remittitur.43 In 1990, theCourt of Criminal Appeals held thatthe section of Article 22.16(c) whichrequired a court to forbear a finaljudgment in a bond forfeiture for 18months after the forfeiture was takenwas a violation of the separation ofpowers doctrine and held that thesection was unconstitutional.44

Subsequently, the courts determinedthat the provisions of Article 22.16(a),which relied upon timetablesestablished by Article 22.16(c), alsocontravened the separation of powersdoctrine and it, too, becameunenforceable.45 Finally, in 1993, theCourt of Criminal Appeals ruled thatmandatory remittitur, in any form, wasunconstitutional.46

The 78th Legislature repealedprovisions regarding time limits when abond forfeiture judgment was final.Art. 22.16, C.C.P., now addressesremittitur and when the court shall andmay remit a bail forfeiture beforejudgment is final. Mandatory remittiturremains unconstitutional.47

After a review of the Texas Code ofCriminal Procedure Chapters 17 and 22and the attendant common law, youshould have a fair basis for theprosecution of bail bond forfeituresregardless of whether you practice in aboard county or a non-board county.There is a wealth of informationavailable through TDCAA forprosecutors who want to prosecute orbegin to prosecute bail bondforfeitures. Both TDCAA and TMCECoffer a forms manuals that containalmost all the forms you need for asuccessful bail bond program. (Editor’snote: Log onto www.tdcaa.com orwww.tmcec.com to locate the bail bond forms.)

Go forth and prosecute bail bondforfeitures!

________________________Reprinted from The Texas Prosecutor withpermission from the Texas District andCounty Attorneys Association.

______________________________________

1 Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann § 22.10, Deesv. State, 865 S.W.2d 461 (Tex. Crim. App.1993); and Williams v. State, 707 S.W.2d 40(Tex. Crim. App. 1986).2 Tex. Occ. Code § 1704.051.3 Tex. Occ. Code § 1704.052.4 Id.This roughly includes the sheriff, or adesignee, a district judge with criminaljurisdiction, the county judge or amember of the commissioners court,judge of a county court or county court atlaw, the district attorney or an assistant, alicensed bondsman, a justice of thepeace, the district clerk or a designee, thecounty clerk or a designee, a municipaljudge, and the county treasurer. Pleasesee the statute for greater detail andexplanation.5 Such as transferring the duty to regulatethe bondsmen from the soleresponsibility of the sheriff to the board.6 Such as punishing a bondsman forimproperly withdrawing from a bond bymaking him refund part or all of the feefor the bond back to the principal. Tex.Occ. Code § 1704.207.7 Although the funds from bail bondforfeitures go to the general fund, theCommissioners Court may direct thefunds from the general fund whereverthey desire.8 Tex. Code Crim. Proc. § 17.08. All theelements set out in the statute must bepresent.9 Tex. Code Crim. Proc. § 17.06 & 17.07;Schnitzius v. Koons, 813 S.W.2d 213(Tex. App.–Dallas 1991); and UnitedStates v. McCallum, 788 F.2d 1042 (5th

Cir. 1985). An insurance bond without apower of attorney is unenforceableagainst the insurance company.10 Op. Tex. Att’y Gen. No. JM-363(October 22, 1985); Ex parte Deaton,582 S.W.2d 151 (Tex. Crim. App. 1975);and Ex parte Rodriguez, 583 S.W.2d 792(Tex. Crim. App. 1979). The magistratemay recommend a form – such as cash –but that recommendation is not reallyenforceable. There are several types ofbonds: personal recognizance [rare],personal, cash, and surety [professional{bondsman} and private [other citizens].11 Mackintosh v. State, 845 S.W.2d 261(Tex. App.–Houston [1st Dist.] 1992, nowrit).12 Cheatam v. State, 13 Tex. Ct. App. 32

(1884); see also, Swaim v. State, 498S.W.2d 988 (Tex. Crim. App. 1973).13 Tex. Code Crim. Proc. § 22.04 andHubbard v. State, 814 S.W.2d 402 (Tex.App.–Waco 1991, no writ). If there is asurety, then the citation to the principalneed only be sent regular U. S. Mail andservice is complete upon posting. Tex.Code Crim. Proc. § 22.05. Despite thisprovision, it may be prudent to alwaysused certified mail when serving bymail.14 Id.15 Tex. R. Civ. P. 28 (2002); Tex. Bus. &Com. Code § 36.10; and Chilkewitz v.Hyson, 22 S.W.3d 825 (Tex. 1999, onremand, review denied).16 Tex. Code Crim. Proc. § 17.06; Tex.Ins. Code Art. 1.14; and Freedom, Inc.v. State, 569 S.W.2d 48 (Tex. Civ.App.–Austin 1978).17 Id.18 Id.19 Tex. R. Civ. P. 106 & 107 (2002) andTex. Code Crim. Proc. §§ 22.05 &22.06.20 Tex. R. Civ. P. 15 & 239 (2002) andTex. Code Crim. § 22.15.21 Tex. R. Civ. P. 245 & 216 (2002). Therequest must be in writing and the juryfee must be paid at least 30 days prior tothe trial date.22 Tocher v. State, 517 S.W.2d 299 (Tex.Crim. App. 1975) and Hernden v. State,865 S.W.2d 521 (Tex. App.–SanAntonio 1993).23 Hokr v. State, 545 S.W.2d 463 (Tex.Crim. App. 1977). Recently, the CorpusChristi Court of Appeals has indicatedthat a court may not take judicial noticeof a the bond. See, Guy Williams d/b/aFreedom Bail Bonds v. State, No. 13-01-00822-CV (Corpus Christi, August 8,2002).24 Tex. R. Evid. 902 (2002) andInternational Fidelity InsuranceCompany v. State, 65 S.W.3d 724 (Tex.App.–El Paso 2001).25 Hill v. State, 920 S.W.2d 468 (Tex.App.–Waco 1996, rehearing denied,review granted, reversed on othergrounds 995 S.W.2d 96) and Bob SmithBail Bonds v. State, 963 S.W.2d 555(Tex. App.–Fort Worth 1998).26 Rodriguez v. State, 673 S.W.2d 635(Tex. App.–San Antonio 1984, no writ)and Telles v. State, 911 S.W.2d 820(Tex. App.–El Paso 1995).

B


27 Tex. Code Crim. Proc. § 22.13.28 Yarbrough v. State, 703 S.W.2d 645(Tex. Crim. App. 1985) and Alvarez v.State, 861 S.W.2d 878 (Tex. Crim. App.1993).29 Scott v. State, 617 S.W.2d 691 (Tex.Crim. App. 1981); Balboa v. State, 612S.W.2d 553 (Tex. Crim. App. 1981); andWatson v. State, 32 S.W.3d 335 (Tex.App.–San Antonio 2000). A challenge tothe bond must be made at the time ofexecution, not at final hearing.30 Hill v. State, 955 S.W.2d 96 (Tex.Crim. App. 1997) and Reyes v. State, 31S.W.3d 343 (Tex. App.–Corpus Christi2000).31 Gourley v. State, 344 S.W.2d 882(Tex. Crim. App. 1961) and Sanders v.State, 312 S.W.2d 660 (Tex. Crim. App.1958).32 Tex. Code Crim. Proc. § 17.19.33 Tex. Code Crim. Proc. § 17.16.34 Apodaca v. State, 493 S.W.2d 859(Tex. Crim. App. 1973) and McConathyv. State, 545 S.W.2d 166 (Tex. Crim.App. 1977).35 Id.36 Id.37 Allegheny Mutual Casualty Insurancev. State, 710 S.W.2d 139 (Tex. App.–Houston [14th Dist.] 1986); Apodaca andMcConathy, supra; and Tex. Occ. Code§ 1704.205. The settlement provisionappears to apply only the board counties.38 Tex. Code Crim. Proc. § 17.16.39 Id.40 Id. It is probably wise to arrange for ahold or a warrant for the principal beforethe surety is absolved.41 Black’s Law Dictionary 1164 (5th ed.1979). Read remittitur as “refund.”42 Tex. Code Crim. Proc. § 22.16 andTex. Rev. Civ. Stat. Ann. Art. 2372p-3 §13 (Vernon 1998).43 Tex. Occ. Code § 1704.44 Armadillo Bail Bonds v. State, 802S.W.2d 237 (Tex. Crim. App. 1990).45 State v. Matyastik, 811 S.W.2d 102(Tex. Crim. App. 1991) and Nash v.State, 811 S.W.2d 698 (Tex. App. –Houston [14th Dist.] 1991, reviewdismissed 842 S.W.2d 695).46 Lyles v. State, 850 S.W.2d 497 (Tex.Crim. App. 1993) and Bullin v. State,836 S.W.2d 305 (Tex. App.–Houston[14th Dist.] 1992, review refused).47 Id.

Have You Logged on Lately?

New Codes for DPS MonthlyConviction Reports

3204: Passing Authorized Emergency Vehicle

3409: Motorcycle Safety Course


The plight of Preston Tate beganmore than 33 years ago in theHouston Municipal Court. Convictedof multiple fine-only offenses andfacing a steep fine of $425, the lawafforded Mr. Tate only one of twooptions: pay the fine and costs in fullimmediately or be committed to thelocal “P farm” until such time thatthe judgment of the court wassatisfied. Other than being poor,Preston Tate did nothing to legallyjustify his incarceration. [For a morecomplete discussion of criminal debt,Tate v. Short and its impact on changesto Texas law see, “Pay or Lay: Tate v.Short Revisited” Municipal CourtRecorder, Vol. 12, No. 3 (March 2003)].

While the Texas Court of CriminalAppeals claimed that Mr. Tate shouldnot be able to use his financial statusto avoid the consequences of hiscriminal misconduct, the U.S.Supreme Court overruled the Courtof Criminal Appeals, and in theprocess found that the laws of Texas,and other states, wereunconstitutional in that they violatedthe equal protection clause of the14th Amendment.1 While the Courtdid not altogether prohibit the use ofincarceration as a means of post-judgment enforcement, it did holdthat individuals without the financialresources to pay must be provided an“alternative means” of dischargingthe fine and costs.

More than 30 years after the U.SSupreme Court’s decision in Tate v.Short, the implications of the decisioncontinue to resonate in Texas and

Serving the Community while AvoidingGetting Served

What Local Governments Cannot Afford to Forgetabout Community Service and the Indigent

By Ryan Kellus Turner, Program Attorney & Deputy Counsel, TMCEC

beyond. Implicit in the holding ofTate is the recognition that the legalsystem must differentiate between thecrimes of the poor and the poverty inwhich some Americans live.Especially in the context of fine-onlyoffenses, the law prior to Tateeffectively made poverty itself thebasis of incarceration. The decisionin Tate blazed a pathway rich in whatis today familiar terminology:installment plans, time-payment fees,indigent hearings, and communityservice.

As Good as Money

Anticipating the outcome of theSupreme Court’s decision, the TexasLegislature repealed the controversialprovision authorizing the court toorder the defendant to “pay or lay outthe fine.” Notably, the Code ofCriminal Procedure amendments werenot written in light of the Tatedecision but rather as a preemptivemeasure.2 Presumably, this partiallyexplains why Texas statutory lawleaves many indigent-related issuesunaddressed. (E.g., Must thedefendant or the court raise the issue?When must an indigent hearing beconducted? What must such a hearingentail?)3

Yet, despite such lingering questions,it is crystal clear that under Texas lawcommunity service constitutes the“alternative means” of dischargingthe fine and costs mandated by Tate.While the law does not provide astatutory right for the indigent toperform community service, it does

protect indigent people who have notfirst been given an alternative meansof discharging the fine and costsfrom being incarcerated on a capiaspro fine.4

Though community service may beordered in a host of differentcontexts (e.g., as a term of deferreddisposition or as a mandatorysanction for alcohol and tobaccostatus offenses), it is critical that localgovernments differentiatecommunity service in these contextsfrom its context stemming from Tate.In Texas, a defendant “who isdetermined by a court to haveinsufficient resources or income topay fines or costs may discharge allor part of the judgment byperforming community service.”5 Inother words, if a defendant (child oradult) is deemed indigent, underTexas law community service is asgood as money.

The last sentence of the proceedingparagraph may give some readersreasons to pause. No doubt, to some,suggesting that, in the land of thealmighty dollar, anything is “as goodas money” is at best an incredulousstatement. To clarify, “good” is arelative term. To those who viewmunicipal and justice courts simplyas a source of revenue, communityservice at first glance may not beviewed as “good.” On the otherhand, those who respect theprinciples that the judicial systemaspires to preserve (such as equalprotection under law) are likely to seethings differently. The bottom line is


that, under Texas law, a defendant candischarge the judgment through thepayment of money or, if deemedindigent by the court, through theperformance of community service.The law requires local governmentsto honor both forms of currency.

More than Money, MunicipalCourts are about Municipalities

It is hard to imagine anythingpotentially more socially constructivethan service to one’s community.Under Texas law, community servicemay only be performed for a“governmental entity or a nonprofitorganization that provides services tothe general public” and that“enhance(s) social welfare and thegeneral well being of thecommunity.”6 The language of thelaw fully embraces the notion that theefforts of those ordered to performcommunity service have the potentialto assist government in theperformance of its function and/orto constructively contribute to thequality of life in our communities.Blinded by the rising revenuesgenerated by municipal and justicecourts, it is easy for localgovernments to overlook that thesubject matter of municipal andjustice courts is fundamentally rootedin preserving public safety and thequality of life in our communities.7

To this end, maintaining the integrityof local government is predicated onthe ability of local officials andemployees not viewing “fine-only”offenses as being only about the fine.

Outsource: In-House or a Mix?

While some courts may have theresources and authority to establishan in-house community serviceprogram, others will need theauthorization and support of otherlocal governmental entities (citycouncil, city manager, aldermen,county commissioners). (Accordingly,the term “local government” is used

in the broadest sense to include thejudge and all local decision makers.)To avail itself of the benefits ofcommunity service, in the context ofindigent and other defendants, alocal government must make a basicdecision: Will it host a communityservice program? Will indigentdefendants be required to findcommunity service opportunities ontheir own? Or will a hybrid of bothoptions be used?

When making this decision, localofficials should begin by consideringthe basic legal parameters set forth inthe Code of Criminal Procedure:

The governmental entity ornonprofit organization thataccepts a defendant must agree tosupervise the defendant in theperformance of the work.8

The governmental entity ornonprofit organization must agree toreport on the defendant’s work tothe court that ordered thecommunity service.9

A judge may not order more than 16hours of work per week ofcommunity service barring a judicialdetermination that workingadditional hours would notconstitute a hardship for either thedefendant or the defendant’sdependents.10

Effective January 1, 2004, adefendant is considered to havedischarged not less than $50 of finesand costs for each eight hours ofcommunity service performed.11

A defendant may discharge anobligation to perform communityservice by paying at any time the fineand costs assessed.12

With these legal parameters in mind,local governments should considerthe following practical issues:control, costs, and avoiding pitfalls.

Control – In-house communityservice programs afford localgovernments greater control over thetype of community serviceperformed. In turn, there is a greaterassurance that service is performed incompliance with the legal criteria setforth above (e.g., supervision, natureof work, number of hours worked,documentation of work performed).In recent years, courts have reportedlimited instances of outsidecommunity service providerssubmitting false information (i.e.,fraudulent claims that communityservice had been performed).13

Costs – One of the greatest excusesfor not having an in-housecommunity service program is that itis simply too expensive. The reality isthat the cost of having an in-houseprogram is determined by the localgovernment’s community service planand the manner in which the plan isimplemented.

One of the best examples of an in-house community service program isin San Angelo. San Angelo’s firstendeavor into an in-housecommunity service program began in1988 in the form of a communitygarden. The land for the garden wasleased from a church for one dollar.Supplies were donated piecemeal bylocal merchants. Members of localcivic groups provided supervision forcommunity service workers. Within ashort period of time, an empty lotwithout purpose was transformedinto a means of putting food on thetables of local families in need. Thisis just one example of how amunicipality can harness the powerof community service to improve thequality of lives.

How much did the communitygarden cost? One dollar. What is sucha program worth to a community?For the families served, it is notsomething that can simply beassigned a dollar figure.


Not to say that community servicecannot make good fiscal sense.Contrary to common misconception,community service, properlyadministered, can result in net costsavings. The amount of such savingsis dependent upon the scope of thein-house program and the amount oflocal resources dedicated to theinitiative. Once again, consider theexample offered by the City of SanAngelo. Once the community gardenwas established, the city expanded itscommunity service program in aneffort to reduce the city’s sanitationcosts. Today, that program results in anet-savings of $333,000 for the city.14

Other cities have followed SanAngelo’s lead. The City of SugarLand also has a community garden.In 2003, its efforts wereacknowledged in the form of a TMLMunicipal Excellence Award.15 Similarinnovations in large and small townshave been recognized and are proofthat good public policy can alsodirectly translate into good publicity.

Not all in-house community serviceprograms have to be aimed atlowering the city’s bottom line.Embracing the notion that it is theresponsibility of local government toserve the public, a growing numberof localities have joined the Keep

Texas Cities Beautiful Program. Suchprograms reduce the number of localeyesores by transforming weed-filledlots into flower gardens. While thismay seem entirely superficial andwithout economic rewards, scientificresearch suggests that neglectedproperty, the accumulation of trashand litter, graffiti, and other signs ofincivilities invite criminal behaviorand increase fear of crime.16 Even ifthe fear of crime is unfounded,disorderly conditions inneighborhoods and communities candemoralize local residents and directlyresult in the loss of a community’seconomic vitality. This realizationgave birth to community policing andreemphasized nationally theimportance of community courts. In-house community service programscan be an integral component to therevitalization of rural and urbancommunities, a component somecommunities cannot afford tooverlook.

Avoiding Pitfalls – Certainly, courtordered community service could beimproperly used to benefit privatenon-public entities or individuals. Thechances for such abuses, however, areminimized when community service,rather than being outsourced, is keptin-house by local governments.17

Which brings us to the issue of legalliability. A surprising number of localgovernments have been advised bytheir attorneys that communityservice, regardless if in-house oroutsourced, exposes the localgovernment to too much civil liability.It is critical that local governments(and their legal advisors) understandthat this position can potentiallyresult in local governments actuallyincurring liability. While localgovernments are under no legalobligation to operate their owncommunity service programs,governments that do not allowindigent individuals to discharge their

fines and costs through communityservice effectively obstruct the only“alternative means” authorized by theCode of Criminal Procedure.Especially in light of a recentstatutory definition of “indigent,”local governments that refuse toallow eligible defendants to performcommunity service risk lawsuitsalleging civil rights violations underTate.18

Local governments fearing suitsstemming from “outsourced”community service may want toconsider having the defendant sign anacknowledgment and release ofliability. Rest assured, most non-governmental entities havecommunity service workers sign suchreleases. Certainly, local governmentsshould take adequate precautionswhen utilizing community serviceworkers. Such precautions, however,should not be taken to the extremeof precluding eligible defendantsfrom performing community service.

In addition to official, qualified, andsovereign immunity.19 Article45.049(f) of the Code of CriminalProcedure provides statutoryimmunity relating specifically tocommunity service discharged insatisfaction of fine or costs:

A sheriff, employee of a sheriff ’sdepartment, county commissioner,county employee, county judge,justice of the peace, municipalcourt judge, or officer or employeeof a political subdivision otherthan a county is not liable fordamages arising from an act orfailure to act in connection withmanual labor performed by adefendant under this article if theact or failure to act:

(1) was performed pursuant tocourt order; and

(2) was not intentional, wilfully orwantonly negligent, or performedwith conscious indifference or

Municipal CourtsParticipating in theKeep Texas CitiesBeautiful Program

AthensClint

DentonGrand Prairie

HoustonLake JacksonVan Alstyne


reckless disregard for the safety ofothers.

Notably, this Article appears toprovide broader immunity tomunicipal governments than countygovernments. It is also important toemphasize that, for an employee,public official, or governmentalsubdivision to utilize such immunity,the community service must beperformed pursuant to a court order.

Conclusion

Rather than viewing a court orderedcommunity service program as alightening rod of potential legalliability, local governments areencouraged to harness the power ofcommunity service to improve theirtowns and cities.

In Texas, once a local trial courtjudge has deemed a defendant to beindigent, community service is morethan merely an option, it is the law.Accordingly, local governments areencouraged to make communityservice work for the benefit of thecommunity.

Regardless if it is in the form of anin-house program or if defendants areoutsourced to eligible communityservice providers, all judges, legaladvisors, and other public officialsmust consider how their localgovernments will comply with the lawin light of the Code of CriminalProcedure and Tate v. Short.

_____________________1 Tate v. Short, 401 U.S. 395 (1971). Reversing Ex parte Tate, 445 S.W.2d 210(1969).2 For a more complete discussion ofTate v. Short and its impact on changes toTexas law, see Ryan Kellus Turner, “Payor Lay: Tate v. Short Revisited” MunicipalCourt Recorder, Vol. 12, No. 3 (March2003).3 Id.4 While such “pay or lay” orders areillegal in light of Tate, a survey

conducted by TMCEC during FY 03revealed from a sample of 514 judgesthat 24% had previously made suchorders and that 35% knew of judges whocontinued to issue such orders. Suchdefendants who are placed in jail areexpressly providedhabeas corpus relief. See, Article 45.048,Code of Criminal Procedure.5 Article 45.049(a), Code of CriminalProcedure.6 Article 45.049(c), Code of CriminalProcedure.7 The amount of revenue collected bymunicipal courts grew 97.8 percent overthe last ten fiscal years (from$249,799,816 in FY 1994 to $494,194,876in FY 2003).Annual Report of the Texas Judicial System,Fiscal Year 2003, Office of CourtAdministration, Austin, Texas.8 Article 45.049(c). Typically, referencesto “nonprofit organizations” areassociated with 501(c)(3) and (c)(4) non-profit corporations. What constitutes anonprofit organization or a governmentalentity can potentially be the source ofdebate. Judges must look at the purposeof the organization in light of Article45.049. In recent, years some courts havedenied community service opportunitieshosted by churches out of deference tothe separation between church and state.Other courts have opted to notallow defendants (predominantlyjuveniles) to perform community servicethrough schools because the school itself(in contrast to a school district) is not agovernmental entity.9 Ideally, the community service providerafter being informed of the legalrequirements should agree in writing tosupervise and report back at theconclusion of the community service.10 Article 45.049(d).11 Judges may give more credit than the$50, which is the minimal amount ofcredit allowed for an eight-hour period.The amount of $50 was reduced from$100 during the 78th Legislature in aneffort to equalize community servicecredit with jail credit. Courts shouldremember that the $50 amount onlyapplies to offenses occurring on or afterJanuary 1, 2004.12 Article 45.049(a).

13 Filing false information with a court isa Class A misdemeanor punishable by upto one year in jail and a maximum fine of$4000. Section 37.10, Penal Code.14 The actual savings to the city is$450,000. The annual cost of operatingthe program is $117,000.15 “The Sugar Land Community Gardenfills a void in community serviceprograms in the City of Sugar Land andFort Bend County. Instead of payingmunicipal citations for Class Cmisdemeanor offenses, some juvenilesare assigned to work in the gardenlocated in the city’s public workscomplex. The garden makes it possiblefor juveniles who appear in court withmisdemeanor offenses to personally bearresponsibility for their actions. Over 550youths have done community service atthe garden, weeding, planting, watering,harvesting, and repairing fences. Localbusinesses have backed the garden as wellby donating tools, seeds, plants, watersprinklers, and more. The garden hasproduced 2,047 pounds of produce,which is then donated to the Fort BendHuman Needs Ministry for distributionto needy families. The community gardenis a win-win from all perspectives.” TexasTown & City, Vol. LXXXX No. 11December 2003 at 23.16 See generally, George Kelling andCatherine Coles, Fixing Broken Windows:Restoring Order and Reducing Crime in OurCommunities, New York, N.Y.: Simon &Schuster (1996).17 For a more detailed discussion, see JoDale Bearden, “Keys to SuccessfulCommunity Service Programs”Municipal Court Recorder, Vol. 10, No. 3(May 2001).18 Effective January 1, 2004, Section133.002(2) of the Tax Code states that“indigent” means an individual who earnsnot more than 125 percent of the incomestandard established by applicable federalpoverty guidelines.19 For a detailed discussion of immunityin the context of municipal government,see David Brooks, 22 Municipal Law andPractice, Sections 2.04-2.05 (West 2d. ed.1999).

B


Community Service Provider Acknowledgment/Agreement (Art. 45.049(c), C.C.P.)

CAUSE NUMBER: _______________

STATE OF TEXAS § IN THE MUNICIPAL COURT

VS. § CITY OF __________________

_____________________ § ___________COUNTY, TEXAS

Dear Sir or Madam:

The Defendant in the above styled cause has been ordered to perform ___________________________ hours ofcommunity service:

¨ in satisfaction of fine and costs.

¨ by order of the Court.

¨ by order of the Court and as required pursuant to State law.

Community service may only be performed for either a governmental entity or a nonprofit organization that providesservice to the general public and enhances social welfare and the general well-being of the community.

An eligible entity or organization that agrees to accept a defendant to perform community service MUST AGREE TO:

1. SUPERVISE the Defendant in the performance of the work; and

2. REPORT on the Defendant’s work to the Court that ordered the community service.

The following is the Court’s contact information:

________________________________________________

________________________________________________

________________________________________________

________________________________________________

Please complete, detach, and return the following information and keep the preceding information for your records.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

By signing below, I ACKNOWLEDGE the preceding information, ATTEST that my entity or organization is an eligiblecommunity service provider, and AGREE to the enumerated terms set forth above.

Printed name of eligible entity or organization: _________________________________________________________________

Printed name of entity or organization representative: ____________________________________________________________

Signature of entity or organization representative: _______________________________________________________________

Date: _______________________________________________________________

WARNING: Filing false information with the Court is a Class A misdemeanor punishable by up to one year in jail and amaximum fine up to $4,000.


RESOURCES FOR YOUR COURT

Crime Victims’ WeekThe Office for Victims of Crime (OVC) has announced theavailability of the 2004 National Crime Victims’ Rights Week(NCVRW) Resource Guide and poster. These resources weredesigned to help you generate victim and public awarenessduring National Crime Victims’ Rights Week, set for April18-24, 2004. This year’s theme is “Victims’ Rights:America’s Values.”

The 2004 Resource Guide includes many new features. Forthe first time, all the camera-ready art is available on a CDto simplify replication. A DVD of the introductory themevideo is provided for use in victim and public awarenessevents. You will also find two new documents that describeOVC’s rich history and commemorate the 20th anniversaryof the Crime Victims’ Fund. The 2004 Resource Guide isfilled with great theme-oriented ideas and strategies thatwill allow you to join thousands of other victim assistanceand allied organizations in commemorating the 2004National Crime Victims’ Rights Week.

Both the 2004 NCVRW Poster (LT000487) and the 2004Resource Guide (NCJ 202045) are now available from theOVC Resource Center (OVCRC). Please contact OVCRC at800/851-3420 (TTY 877/712-9279) to place your order.For immediate access to the Resource Guide, visit the OVCwebsite at www.ojp.usdoj.gov/ovc/ncvrw/welcome.html toview the files online. If you would like to be added to themailing list to receive future NCVRW Resource Guides andposters, please call the OVC Resource Center.

Municipal BooksInformation Service

The Texas Municipal League (TML), in partnership withBookPeople, provides a unique, cities-related bookinformation service. Access the TML home page on theInternet at www.tml.org. Click on the BookPeople icon inthe upper right corner of the TML home page. In thisspecial section, you can browse for and order cities-relatedpublications. TML plans to continually build upon thisspecial web area to offer a thoughtful blend of classic andcurrent works relevant to the daily governance andoperations of cities. Send reading suggestions [email protected], including the title, author, publisher, andISBN number (if you have it).

Court PerformanceStandards

The article on page 17 of this newsletter by Greg Toomeyof the Downtown Austin Community Court refers to courtperformance standards. The National Center for StateCourts (NCSC) has developed model performancestandards that may be downloaded online atwww.ncsconline.org/D_Research/TCPS/Introduction.htm.Access the NCSC budget help page at www.ncsconline.org/D_Comm/BudgetPage.htm. NCSC also offers aninformative video on performance that may be viewedonline at www.ncsconline.org/D_Reserach/TCPS/index.html.

Video


Sometimes even the best manager islike the little boy with the big dog,waiting to see where the big dog wantsto go so he can take him there.

--Lee Iacocca, former Chrysler CEO

Dog day afternoons are currently thedismal rule during court budgetaryplanning. The current overalldiminished budget pool has resultedfrom a slowly recovering economyoccurring at the same time that publicsafety spending priorities haveunderstandably been increasing. Thesecircumstances tug at the coequalgovernment branch status of thecourts in many jurisdictions. It isimportant for the courts to ensure thefiscal strain on the leash does notpreclude meeting judicial obligations.

Interbranch control issues predictablybecome more acute during tighteconomic times. The judicial branchoften is viewed as subservient to theLegislature or local funding unit’spower of the purse and the executivebranch’s control over the budget. Theprevailing notions among many inthose arenas are that courts mustcompete with other units ofgovernment for the scarce resources,and that it is the funding unit’s job toprotect citizens against unnecessaryagency expenditures.

Many in the judicial branch, however,believe that the power of court-ordered funding supersedes legislativepowers over the purse wheninsufficient funding jeopardizes thedischarge of judicial branchobligations.

These contrary views frequently createa tension that is difficult to reconcileand that operates to cloud sharedgovernmental obligations. Thebranches of government need to view

Court Budget Planning during Lean TimesBy Greg Toomey, Court Administrator, Downtown Austin Community Court

themselves as equally responsiblepartners, seeking to achieve aneffective allocation of finite resources.

Court managers are frequently themost visible advocates for proposedcourt budgets. They come to the tablerepresenting the collaborative fundingposition of the presiding or chiefjudge and the panel of judicial officers.This consensus budget draft thenbecomes the basis of a justificationand budgetary marketing effort. It is atthis juncture that the abilities of thecourt manager become crucial. Themanager is the consensus builderamong funding unit members. Witnessa live cliché: Those who can go alongand get along serve their courtfaithfully and well.

Historically, court budgets have beenlargely inflexible, with about 85percent of their budget sharededicated to required expenditures.Over the last 10-15 years, however,required statutory and mandatedoperational expenditures are estimatedto have increased to approximately 95percent of the federal, state, and localcourts’ budget share.1 The currentfiscal environment has strainednecessary operational fundingamounts as well as developmentalfunding.

During better economic times, courtsat times were the beneficiaries of grantfunding that supported pilot projectsin diverse focus areas. At present,however, funding for innovativeprojects is becoming much moredifficult to acquire. Federal grantdollars for these projects have beennotably reduced. Currently, themajority of judicial branch grantfunding is for renewal projects that areon a declining resource allocation

schedule for a fixed number of years.As an example: The State Justice Institute,a federally funded court grantororganization, may be cycling out ofexistence by the end of the current ornext fiscal year cycle.

During December 2003, the U.S.House passed an Omnibus spending bill(H.R. 2673) for FY 2004, impacting 14entities. Justice programs were one ofthe organizational areas included in thebill. Funding for each of the entitieshad failed as individual spending bills.The Senate will consider this bill duringJanuary 2004. The bill provides forrescission of some previouslyauthorized funding for FY 2003.Among other cuts, this spending billdecreased funding in the amount of$21.6 million from the Office ofJustice Programs (OJP) accounts forFY 2004. Increasingly, judicial branchinnovations are occurring on theperiphery, if they are happening at all.

The prior availability of alternativefunding sources lessened demands fordevelopmental funding from GeneralFunds. Unfortunately, this formerbountiful funding environment helpeddiminish expectations among state andlocal funding unit members that GeneralFunds would in the future have tobecome a critical funding componentfor vanguard projects. From theunderstandably flinching perspective ofthe funding unit members, it can fairlybe said that the universally shrinkingamount of General Fund dollarsimpedes both innovative and baselinefunding for all agencies.

During budget planning, it is notnecessary for courts to forsake allalternative funding possibilities,however. While the potential granttilling acreage has ruefully shrunk to


garden size, it does still exist. Fundingopportunities are reported regularly inthe Federal Register. A developingpattern has been the willingness ofprivate foundations to fundpartnerships of public sector, faith-based, and nonprofit organizationsthat are pursuing nontraditionaladjudicative and therapeuticjurisprudence goals. The Chronicle ofPhilanthropy is an excellent source forthese collaborative possibilities(www.philanthropy.com). There are anumber of private publishing servicesreporting on funding opportunitiesfor the criminal justice system.Consistent with court goals, grantresearch can still be an effectiveplanning tool for the budgetaryplanning process.

Exigent circumstances seem to alwaystrump theoretical conjecture. Themost easily identifiable needs of thepresent budgetary cycle combinedwith those most likely to emergeduring planning for the upcomingthree cycles form a baseline budgetarystatement for the court that can besupported by an advocacy effortcarefully crafted to be politicallyacceptable, performance-based,demonstrable (or otherwise fatallyflawed), and fiercely competitive. Ourmanagement team begins each newbudget cycle by internalizing thenotion that Custer had a better chanceof escaping in Montana than we do ofmaneuvering the proposed budgetthrough the approval processunscathed. This promotes a mindsetopen to compromise. A validassumption in tight economic times isthat there is a heightened demand forstrict accountability in all court serviceand performance contexts.

Such an assumption only emphasizesthat the relationship betweencustomer service and court budget issignificant. If the court customersbelieve they are getting the righttreatment, this perception is inevitablycommunicated to the funding unit

members. It becomes apparent thatthe allocated court budget isunderwriting service and value for thecitizens. Working on superiorcustomer service every day bolstersbudget share.

In addition to meeting customerservice expectations, we always try tomatch revenue estimates to realisticallyanticipated income expectations. Casedispositions are always anothermeaningful performance indicator, themore so if cases are increasing and theincrease can be addressed with existinghuman capital and technologyresources. This is an economy of scaledemonstration that resonates well withthe funding unit.

Circumspect budget planning involvesa trifecta that budgets forperformance, provides preciseaccountability through objectivemeasurement, and is tied to clearperformance standards. During tight

economic times, scrap and build is wellreceived. New initiatives are matchedwhenever possible to savings producedby the discontinuation of the leasteffective activities or programs.

Engaging prudent, explainable, andgoal-oriented business managementpractices for budgeting constitutes themost critical contribution courtmanagers can make during thesedifficult financial times, and can alsoenable the three governmentalbranches to avoid an adversarialinvocation of the Constitution.1 Statistics and premise from Michigan JudicialInstitute monograph, A Changing Environment:Implications for Courts and Courts’ Acquisition andManagement of Resources, 1999, 2002,John K. Hudzik, Ph.D.

__________________

Article orally reported at a City of AustinDepartment Director’s Meeting and submitted01/04 to the Municipal Court Recorder, TexasMunicipal Courts Education Center, Austin,Texas.

The National Association of CourtManagement (NACM) established theJustice Achievement Award in 1988to recognize outstanding achievementand meritorious projects that enhancethe administration of justice. The2003 winner is the FinancialManagement Counseling Pilot Project,submitted by the Office of CourtAdministration (OCA) and developedby Jim Lehman of OCA incooperation with the Dallas CountyCriminal Courts CollectionsDepartment. The project targetedoffenders with high debt-to-incomeratios for whom the addition of fines,fees, and costs to their debt loadwould likely cause them to default ontheir personal financial obligations,court-ordered fines, fees, and costs,

Justice Achievement Award:Congratulations Jim!

or both. Financial counseling wasoffered to participating offendersand a large percentage of programparticipants were able to fully meettheir court-ordered obligations.TMCEC joins NACM in recognizingthe outstanding leadership of JimLehman and the Office of CourtAdministration in the area of finecollection.

See also on page 2 the notice of anupcoming conference offered by theGovernment Collectors Associationof Texas in which Mr. Lehman willbe a featured speaker.

B


FROM THE CENTER

TMCEC is offering a special seminaron Magistrate Duties. This program isdesigned for municipal judges who, inaddition to the their judicial duties,perform magistrate functions on aregular basis.

Seminar Site and Dates:AustinJune 15-16, 2004 (T-W)Hyatt Regency Austin208 Barton Springs Road, Austin78704512/477-1234

Topics tentatively scheduled foraddress include:

§ An Overview of Magistrate Duties§ Search and Arrest Warrants§ Probable Cause

§ Presentation before the Magistrate§ Setting Bail§ Magistrates Orders for Emergency

Protection§ Examining Trials§ Property Hearings§ Emergency Mental Commitments§ Federal and State Case Law Update§ Attorney General Opinion Update§ Ethics

Please register by May 21, 2004. Incontrast to the traditional 12-hourconferences that expose judges to avariety of subjects and presenters, theSpecial Topic Seminar will have fewerpresenters and will concentrate onexploring different facets of thissingle subject matter. Presentationswill be longer in length, subjects will

be explored in greater depth, andthere will be greater opportunity foraudience interaction.

NOTE: To attend this Special TopicSeminar, a judge must have attendedeither a TMCEC 32-hour or 12-hourprogram during the last academic year(FY 2002-2003). Enrollment will beon a first-come, first-served basis andis limited to the first 70 qualifiedjudges. This seminar fulfills themandatory judicial educationrequirement for municipal judges.Judges who have already attended aregional 12-hour TMCEC programmay attend this program at their ownexpense.

What began as a concept in 1995 has now blossomedinto a well-respected professional developmentprogram. The number of certified municipal clerksclearly reflects the enthusiasm and hard work ofmunicipal court clerks in Texas:

• 541 Level I Certified Court Clerks,• 148 Level II Certified Court Clerks, and• 11 Certified Municipal Court Clerks (Level III).

Where do I start?The best place to start is by getting your hands on aLevel I Study Guide,1 then read and work through thequestions. The exam questions are taken from the StudyGuide. The Study Guide may be purchased fromTMCEC or downloaded from the TMCEC website:www.tmcec.com/clerkcr1.htm.

Certification continued on page 21

Municipal Court Clerk Certification FAQs & Answers

Once you are comfortable with the material, register toattend a pre-conference course ($15). The game-styledcourses are offered before each of the 12-Hour RegionalClerk Conferences and are a good gauge for readiness.2

Lastly, take the exam.

What is the format of the exam?All three levels of the exams are multiple-choice and true/false.

What do I need to do to take the exam?Once you feel ready to take the exam, complete aregistration form3 and send it to TMCEC with a check madeout to TCCA in the amount of $50 for TCCA members or$75 for non-TCCA members for Levels I and II. For LevelIII, the cost is $25 a part or $50 for the complete exam(three parts total). The exams are scheduled from 1–5 p.m.

Special Topic Seminar: Magistrate Duties


CLERK’S CORNER

CLE

RKCORNER

Clerks reading this article might wonderwhy administrative parking is beingaddressed in the “Clerk’s Corner.” Thisissue is presented here because the clerkis usually involved in researching issuesand changes that the city wants to maketo court processing, and changingparking to civil makes a big difference inprocessing. Discussed in this article isthe statute governing administrativeparking, along with information fromthe City of Austin’s ordinance, whichwill show the municipal clerk’s role inprocessing administrative parking.

Chapter 682 of the TransportationCode provides rules that allowmunicipalities to declare by ordinanceparking and stopping offenses to be civiloffenses. However, only municipalitiesthat have a population greater than30,000 may adopt such an ordinance.

When parking is declared civil, anadministrative hearing is conducted.This hearing is not conducted by themunicipal judge but by a hearing officer,who has authority to impose civil fines,costs, and fees, to administer oaths, andto issue orders compelling theattendance of witnesses and theproduction of documents. The ordersto compel attendance of witnesses or toproduce documents are enforced by themunicipal court.

A person receiving a parking citation hasthe right to an instanter hearing,meaning that the person may have ahearing immediately. When a personappears and a hearing officer determinesthe person is liable for the parking orstopping violation, the officer mustissue an order for the amount of thefine, costs, or fees assessed against the

person. If a person fails to appear atthe hearing, the person is considered tohave admitted liability for the offensecharged and is automatically assessed afine, costs, or fees. The registeredowner is presumed to be the personwho parked or stopped the vehicle.

The enforcement for a civil offense isdifferent from a criminal offense. If anoffender does not pay, the city mayhave his or her vehicle:

• impounded if the offender hascommitted three or more parkingor stopping offenses within acalendar year; or

• booted, which is a device thatprevents movement of the vehicle.

Furthermore, a city’s ordinance mayallow an additional fine to be imposed;deny issuance of or revoke a parking oran operating permit; and may permitthe city to file an action to collect thefine and costs.

Section 682.011, T.C., provides that anoffender who has been determined tobe in violation of the parking ordinancemay appeal. The statute provides thatthe offender must present a petition tothe clerk of the court and pay the costsnot later than the 30th day after the dateof the order of the fine and costs to bepaid.

Although Chapter 682, T.C., providesauthority and rules for administrativelyhandling parking, it does not providespecifics about how civil parking ismanaged. These issues are ordinarilyaddressed by a city’s ordinance. TheCity of Austin’s ordinance might beused as an example.

Administrative Adjudication of Parkingand Stopping Offenses

By Margaret Robbins, Program Director, TMCECThe clerk of the Austin MunicipalCourt is responsible for implementingand enforcing the ordinance and forappointing hearing officers. The formof the parking citation is prescribed bythe clerk, who is required to includestatutory requirements. The clerk setsthe hours that hearings are conducted.A person who answers a parkingcitation may pay in person, by mail, orby other method of payment asdetermined by the clerk. The fines andcivil costs are provided for in theordinance and range from $15 to $150.

A person may request a reset of ahearing. The request must be filed withthe clerk at least three days before thehearing date. If the person wants asecond reset, the person must post abond equal to the total amount of thecivil fine, costs, and fees. If a persondoes not receive a response to a requestfor reset, the request is considereddenied and the person must appear asscheduled.

After a hearing officer issues an order,the clerk must file the order in aseparate index or file and may recordthe order by using computer printouts,microfilm, microfiche, or electronic ordata processing techniques.

The Austin ordinance makes provisionsfor the city manager to enter into anagreement with government agencies toprovide jurors or other individualswhose presence is required in a judicialproceeding the use of metered parkingspaces or time-restricted zones. If theagreement provides for dismissal of theparking citation or a reduced fine, ahearing officer or the clerk shall dismissthe citation or reduce the fine. The


installed on a vehicle. These offensesare criminal and filed in the municipalcourt.

A clerk, police officer, city marshal, orparking enforcement officer of the citydesignates which employee isresponsible under an order ofimmobilization or impoundment toimmobilize or to seize a vehicle. Afteran order has been executed, the returnis delivered to the clerk.

Austin’s ordinance provides proceduresfor an appeal. The appeal is initiated byfiling a petition with the clerk alongwith a non-refundable filing fee notlater than 30 calendar days after anorder requiring payment of a fine andcosts is filed with the municipal court.When the clerk receives the petition,the clerk schedules a hearing andnotifies all parties of the hearing. Thishearing is conducted by the municipalcourt.

Rebecca Stark, Clerk of the AustinMunicipal Court, reports that in theirlast fiscal year (Oct. 1, 2002 to Sept. 30,2003), 155,000 parking citations werefiled. Out of the 155,000 cases filed,the hearing officers conducted 4,170

hearings for persons contesting theircitations. Out of the 4,170 cases, 60cases were appealed to the municipalcourt. In addition, 3,504 boot and towcases were filed. These cases arecomprised of the first three parkingcitations that remain unpaid. A $25 feeis added on top of the fine and costsordered paid when a boot and tow caseis filed. Furthermore, of the 3,504 bootand tow cases, only nine personsrequested a hearing. A total of 3,387boot and tow cases were disposed. Theboot and tow hearing is conducted by ahearing officer. At the end of the year,the Austin court shows 137,250 parkingcases disposed. This number includescases filed from previous years.

As can be seen from the Austinstatistics, it may be easier to process andhandle parking administratively insteadof as a criminal offense. This articledoes not address all issues regardingadministrative parking. Clerks can see,however, that the process is vastlydifferent than handling parking as acriminal offense and how important it isthat clerks be involved in the processwhen a city is making a decision abouthow to best handle parking citations.

following each 12-hour TMCEC Clerks RegionalConference and the 12-Hour TMCEC CourtAdministrators Conference.

What is the continuing education requirement andwhat do I do to keep my certification?Effective September 1, 2003, Level I and Level IIcertified court clerks MUST attend 12 hours ofcontinuing education each academic year (September-August) and CMCC, Level III certified court clerks,MUST attend 20 hours of continuing education eachacademic year (September-August). In addition, aCertification Renewal Application for each level4 must becompleted and submitted with proof of training toTMCEC, attention Jo Dale Bearden.

Once your Certification Renewal Application has beenapproved, TCCA will send new certified certificates. Thenew certificates include seals for all the organizationsinvolved and a watermark of Old Main (a building on

ordinance also provides criteria fordismissal or reduced fine.

The Austin ordinance provides criteriafor immobilizing or impounding avehicle. A hearing officer determines ifa vehicle is subject to impoundment orimmobilization. After the hearingofficer issues a written notice of ahearing, the notice is sent regular mailto an address on the vehicle registrationor to a more current address asdetermined by the clerk. A request for ahearing must be submitted in writing tothe clerk not later than the 20th day afterthe date that the notice was sent.

If a hearing officer issues an order ofimpoundment or immobilization, theorder must be filed with the city clerk(city secretary) or the city clerk’sdesignee who may be the clerk of themunicipal court.

The ordinance provides that it is a ClassC misdemeanor for a person tointerfere, obstruct, prevent, or hinder aperson impounding or immobilizing avehicle. In addition, it is a Class Cmisdemeanor if a person tampers,defaces, damages, or attempts toremove an immobilization device

the Texas State University-San Marcos campus).

More Questions? Contact Jo Dale Bearden at 800/252-3718 or [email protected].

The certification program is a cooperative effort of theTexas Court Clerks Association, Texas Municipal CourtsAssociation, Texas State University-San Marcos, andTMCEC.

________________________1 If preparing for the Level I or Level II exam, you must referencethe Level I or Level II Supplement. The Supplements discuss therecent legislative changes.2 For a registration form and a list of dates and locations pleasesee our 2003-2004 Academic Schedule or visit our website atwww.tmcec.com.3 For a registration form and a list of dates and locations pleasesee our 2003-2004 Academic Schedule or visit our website atwww.tmcec.com.4 For a Certification Renewal Application visit our website atwww.tmcec.com/reg_app.html.

Certification continued from page 19

B


COLLECTIONS CORNER

Collections Tool: The TelephoneBy Don McKinley, Assistant Collections Specialist, Office of Court Administration

Last month’s article on amnesty andwarrant roundups generated someinterest in several municipal courtsand hopefully offered some ideas orconsiderations for the future. Thismonth, our focus and discussionmoves to a collections tool that isinexpensive, efficient, and one whichwe all possess but is often overlooked... the telephone.

So, why the telephone? Besides beingaccessible and available to each of us,other advantages of using thetelephone are: it allows immediatecontact with the defendant; it is anopportunity to affect a collectionstransaction; it is normally a low costitem; it is quick to use; and thedefendant is aware he/she has beenpersonally located.

There are several reasons why a casemay become delinquent. Thesereasons may be grouped into fourcategories:

1) Circumstantial—Thesedefendants are unable to pay theirfines, fees, and court costs due to lifeissues, such as loss of job, naturaldisaster, sickness, or personal injury;

2) Emotional—These defendantsusually live above their means andincome. I want it – “I deserve it onmy terms” mentality;

3) Intellectual—These defendantsusually have the means to pay, butaren’t good with finances or inkeeping records. They may have nounderstanding of their financialsituation; and

4) Criminal intent—Thesedefendants use fraud and

deceit…never intending to pay. “Comeand get me.” The good news is thisgroup usually represents only aboutfive percent of the court’s totalcaseload.

You may have heard these lines usedby defendants while on the telephone.Try and place these phrases into oneof the four categories listed above.

• “I don’t have a job,” or “I just gotlaid off.”

• “Hopefully, I can make a paymentnext month.”

• “I sent the payment in already; mustbe lost in the mail.”

• “I will pay when I feel like it.”

• “He/she is not at home,” or “He/she doesn’t live here anymore.”

• “I have already paid that,” or “I havemailed in the proof of payment,proof of insurance, or requiredpaperwork.”

• “The person is deceased.”

• “Hey, I can’t pay the whole thing. Ineed the money for other needs.Something is better than nothing,isn’t it?”

One thing to consider when adefendant is giving you a reason fornot paying his/her fines, fees, andcourt costs is whether the defendant isgiving you a stall or an objection. It isimportant to determine the “true”reason for default or non-payment bythe defendant. A stall is when adefendant offers an excuse. A stall isnot the REAL reason why thedefendant isn’t paying or fulfilling theobligation. An objection deals directly

with the payment issue and the reasonWHY the defendant will not pay. Itcan also be a dispute of an item offact.

When making telephone collectioncalls to defendants, one can follow thesteps outlined below. These steps haveproven to be a successful method toeffectuate collections and are taughtand supported by OCA,Governmental Collectors Associationof Texas, and American CollectorsAssociation.

STEP 1 – Getting Ready toCall

Being prepared and informed beforeyou call is critical. Before you makeyour call, be sure to review thefollowing items:

• the total amount the defendant owesthe court;

• the number of cases that thedefendant has pending;

• how many of the defendant’s casesare in warrant status; and

• the date the current citation wasfiled and description of the offense.

Also, check for any previous contactswith the defendant, case notes, andoutcomes. Have you personally dealtwith this defendant in the past? Also,be prepared to discuss the optionsavailable to the defendant, and/or thelatest date you will accept paymentfrom the defendant.

STEP 2 – Making theCollections Call

Follow the eight-step telephonecollections process.


1. Identify the defendant (or) theperson you are speaking with andhis or her relationship to thedefendant. Also, smile during yourgreeting (yes, you can hear a smilethrough the phone).

2. Identify yourself and the reasonfor your call. However, if you arespeaking to someone other thanthe defendant, the purpose of thecall should not be communicated,and leave your name andtelephone number for a return callfrom the defendant. Also, youshould never mention “warrant foryour arrest” or leave warrantinformation on an answeringmachine message.

3. Request immediate payment infull. Most missed opportunitiesexist because of the failure torequest that the defendant pay thecase in full. If you take credit cardpayments over the telephone, youmay offer to handle the caseimmediately while the defendant ison the telephone.

4. After the payment in fullrequest is made…PAUSE. Waitfor a response from the defendantto your request. There may be upto 10 seconds of silence while thedefendant is thinking about yourrequest and his/her response. Ifthe defendant responds withanything other than paying in fullimmediately or a promise to pay infull, you will need to advance tothe next step.

5. Define the issue. Define theissue by closely examining thereasons why the balance hasn’tbeen paid (remembering stalls andobjections). Applying the MaslowModel at this step may define whatmotivation technique will workbest with the defendant. TheMaslow Model has five levels. Dr.Abraham H. Maslow stated thateach individual has needs thatmust be met, and that each person

falls into one of the followinglevels: physical, security, social,esteem, and self-fulfillment. Anindividual at the physical level is atthe basic level, “I can’t pay this.My rent is due.” A person at thesecurity level might be concernedabout how this will affect his/hercredit or security, “How is thisgoing to affect my credit or creditrating?” At the social level,individuals are concerned aboutprestige, “Who else knows aboutthis?” A person at the esteem levelmay be much too busy to beconcerned about a traffic citation,“How dare you call me about abill.” The self-fulfillment levelnormally involves an importantindividual, busy, or wealthydefendant, “I can’t concernmyself with this.” This willdetermine how you proceed withthe collection call, and it is up toyou to determine the issue orproblem. You must also controlthe telephone conversation. Howyou control the telephone call isby asking questions. When youhave defined the issue or problem,you can move on to the nextstep—the solution.

6. Develop the solution. Thesolution may actually bedeveloped by the defendant alone;however, in most cases,negotiation between you and thedefendant will be used.Negotiation is a process whereyou work with the defendant to

resolve the problem. Whennegotiating you should: maintainthe lead and control in theconversation; gain insight from thedefendant; show an interest in thedefendant while on the phone; beorganized and focused on theissue—as the defendant willattempt to use stalls and objections(see above) to get you off track;use specifics in your statements;speak in simple terms; and beclear, positive, friendly, and calm.Never use critical or offensivewords, and remember to use THEPAUSE—recognize the value ofsilence.

Once you know the reason why acase hasn’t been paid, you mustconvince the defendant it is in hisor her best interest to pay andresolve the matter. The type ofappeal for payment used (i.e., anappeal to the defendant’s honesty,pride, or anxiety) will be based onwhere the defendant fits onMaslow’s hierarchy level of needs.An appeal to the defendant’shonesty works on all five levels; anappeal to the defendant’s prideworks best with someone on thetop three levels (social, esteem, andself-fulfillment); and an appeal tothe defendant’s anxiety, which isthe threat of arrest by warrant orturning a case over to a secondarycollector, works best for adefendant on the two lowest levels(physical and security).

7. Close the deal. Believe it or not,some collection calls fail becausethe caller assumes the defendantknows what to do next. Youshould not make any assumptionsand should only end the call afteryou have addressed the followingitems to close the deal. First, get anagreement from the defendant ona payment method and the DATEthe payment can be expected. Give

Collections continued on page 25Hierarchy of Needs Diagram


COURT SECURITY

Prisoner TransportationBy Ron White, President, Texas Marshal Association

As I began preparing to write thisarticle, I couldn’t help but reflect backto the beginning of my career. Like alot of you, I started my career as acorrections officer for a large countyjail. It was during this time that Igained much of the knowledge I havenow about transporting prisoners.During my career, I have had theopportunity to transport a widevariety of prisoners with convictionsfrom Class C misdemeanors to capitaloffenses. The skills and knowledge Iobtained then have stayed with methroughout my law enforcementcareer.

As marshals, warrant officers, andbailiffs, prisoner transportation is adaily part of our jobs. It is such aroutine part of our jobs that we oftenbecome complacent. Anytime youperform a task on a regular basis, youbegin to develop certain habits. It isvery important that you develop goodhabits; as the old adage goes, “Badhabits are hard to break.” Many of usview transporting prisoners as a lesserrisk than other aspects of our duties.The reality is that transporting can bea very dangerous part of our job if webecome careless in our daily routine.

There are three basic reasons that weshould all be concerned withperforming safe prisoner transports.The first reason that comes to all ourminds is officer safety. It has beeninstilled in our minds since the firstday of the Police Academy that ournumber one goal is to go home at theend of the day. My observations havebeen that we take every precautionwhen we are out serving warrants,however, once we have the prisoner in

the car, we tend to relax and let ourguard down. The second reason is thepublic’s safety. None of us wouldwant to be responsible for a prisonerescaping from our custody and,ultimately, causing injury or death toan innocent bystander. The thirdreason that we need to be concernedwith safe prisoner transports is theprisoner’s welfare. Once we takecustody of that individual, we aresolely responsible for his or her well-being. I am sure that none of uswould deliberately mistreat or abusesomeone in our custody. However, weneed to ensure that we are notnegligent either.

In our world today, almost everyaction that you and I take and everydecision we make as officers mustbegin with the question, “Will this getme or my agency sued?” It isunfortunate that it has come to this,however, we must be very consciousof this fact. Lawsuits are costly toyour agency and can be costly to youpersonally. One poor decision canend a successful career. While thishardly seems fair, it is the reality ofthe job we do. With all of this inmind, I am sure you are askingyourself, “How can we prevent theselawsuits, reduce our liability, and stillperform our duties?” I believe thatthe answer is a fairly simple one.While we cannot prevent everylawsuit, I believe that we can preventmany of them by developing andimplementing sound policies andprocedures. Policies and proceduresare necessary in order to establishguidelines for safe and securetransports of prisoners, as well as

insuring the safety of the officer andthe general public. These policies mustconform to state, local, and federallaws and ordinances. These policiesmust also provide for the protectionof the prisoners’ civil rights as well.These policies should be reviewed andapproved by the attorney thatrepresents your agency. Once thesepolicies are in place, they must befollowed.

With all of these things in mind, Iwould like to talk about the actualprocess of transporting prisoners. Theprisoner transport begins when a pick-up notice or order for a prisonertransfer is received. Normally, sometype of paperwork is required to movea prisoner from one place to another.This paperwork could be anythingfrom the warrant and arraignmentpaperwork and internal transfer ordersto extradition paperwork whentransporting from out-of-state. Youshould ensure that all your paperworkis in order before you leave. It is alsoimportant to learn as muchinformation as you can about theindividual that you will betransporting. Many times, a telephonecall will work. The questions I typicallyask concern medications and illness. Ialso want to know if the prisoner is anescape risk or has a history of assaulton peace officers. A criminal historywill reveal some of these issues.Remember that you may betransporting them on a Class Cmisdemeanor, but they may have beenjailed or convicted of far more seriouscrimes in the past.

Transport continued on page 25


the defendant specific informationon payment options, mailingdirections, and addresses, andhave the defendant repeat thoseinstructions back to you. Second,confirm with the defendant theimportance of fulfilling thearrangement and agreement made.Explain the responsibilities andconsequences in full to thedefendant. If you promise to dosomething for the defendant,always keep your promise!

8. Update the file(s). Upontermination of the call, thank thedefendant for his/her promptattention and payment, ifapplicable. Then update thedefendant’s case file(s) with dates,notes, and statements made by thedefendant regarding the

conversation. This will make anyfollow up easier. Furthermore, ifsomeone works the case(s) afteryou, he/she will know exactly whatis going on with the case(s).

STEP 3 – Monitor YourEffectiveness

Track your success rate with telephonecontacts. You should find increasedcompliance with court orders and aresulting increase in revenues.Telephone contacts used in conjunctionwith notices have proven to be a highlyeffective means of collection by manycourts in Texas.

STEP 4 – When Do I Start?

Start today. Even if you start onlyplacing calls two hours per week, youwill make an impact. You may laterdiscover that you need a 20 or 40-hour

staff person to make calls for yourcourt in the future. Set some goals andhave fun! The Office of CourtAdministration (OCA) is available toassist you by providing a collectionspresentation, an evaluation of yourcurrent court’s collections process, andby offering suggestions orrecommendations to improve yourefforts. The best news is this can beprovided to your court at no cost.Contact one of OCA’s collectionsspecialists at the phone numbers listedbelow. Best wishes!

______________________________

Don McKinley 512/936-7557OCA-Assistant Collections Specialist

Jim Lehman 512/936-0991OCA-Collections Specialist

Russ Duncan 512/936-7555OCA-Assistant Collections Specialist

Collections continued from page 22

Transport continued from page 24

Once you have all this information andyour necessary paperwork, it is time tocheck your vehicle. Some departmentsrequire you to prep your car at thebeginning of each shift. A thoroughcheck of your vehicle can avoidpotential problems later on. It isalways embarrassing to run out offuel, however, it is even moreembarrassing with a prisoner in thecar. Not to mention the potential forother problems that it creates. Thearea where the prisoner will be ridingneeds to be checked for contrabandand weapons before and after eachtransfer. It is also important to makesure you have the proper restraintsthat are necessary for the transport.This is also a good time to check thecondition of the restraints.

While transporting prisoners, you muststay in contact with your dispatch orcommunications center. It is veryimportant for someone to know whatroute you will be taking in casesomething goes wrong. Once you pickup your prisoner, advise dispatch of

your beginning and ending mileage andavoid stopping anywhere along theroute. It is never appropriate to gothrough a fast food drive-through witha prisoner in your vehicle. In addition,making a traffic stop with a prisoner inthe car is also a bad idea; protect thewelfare of your prisoner.

When you arrive at your destination topick up your prisoner, you should onceagain ensure that you receive all theproper paperwork. Positively identifythe prisoner that you are picking up.Do not depend on jail personnel or jailidentification without pictures andprints. Mistakes can and do occur,especially in your facilities. If theprisoner has any personal property,take possession of it. Never allow theprisoner access to his or her propertywhile in transport. Also, prevent theprisoner from making telephone callsprior to transporting. Occasionally, thisis out of your control. The idea is toprevent an escape plan from being setinto motion that would possibly lead toan ambush-type situation.

A proper search of the prisonershould be performed before leavingthe facility. The prisoner’s body andhis or her clothing should be searchedthoroughly. I have heard officers makestatements to the effect that theydidn’t need to search prisoners beingpicked up from a jail or correctionalfacility. The fact is that prisoners fromthese types of facilities should bechecked very closely. Prisoners in aconfinement setting can be verycreative in making weapons fromthings you and I never thought of.They are also very clever at concealingpaper clips, handcuff keys, and otheritems that can be used to defeathandcuffs and other restraints. Thenext time you are at a correctionalfacility, ask to see all the weapons andcontraband that has been confiscated.They usually have a display fortraining purposes. Some of the mostcommon places to conceal keys andpaper clips are inside seams,waistbands, collars, and cuffs. Inaddition, check the prisoner’s mouth

B


Wait List

Clerks Wait List

Wait List

TMCEC FY04 Academic Calendar

and hair. These are also commonplaces to conceal objects.

After you are satisfied that you havethoroughly searched the prisoner’sbody and clothes, it is now time toplace the prisoner in restraints. Aprisoner should never be placed inyour vehicle and transportedunrestrained. There should not be anyexceptions to this policy. Even themost docile and petite prisoner canquickly become violent anduncontrollable. This is never goodwhen you are driving down a busyroadway. The type of restraint usedmay vary depending on thecircumstances. Transporting a prisonera short distance may only requirehandcuffs. However, if you aretransporting a long distance, you maywant to consider using a waist chain inorder to handcuff the prisoner infront safely. Handcuffing prisoners

behind their back over long distancesmay cause injury, such as to theshoulder or wrist and could even causedifficulty breathing in extreme cases. Ifthe prisoner is an escape risk orviolent, you will want to use leg ironsto secure the legs. A short piece ofchain connected between the leg ironsand handcuffs restricts the prisoner’sability to fight and kick.

Transporting and handling prisoners incourt may require special equipment.Some judges will not allow prisoners tobe restrained during a trial due to theconcern of an appearance of guilt tothe jury. In these cases, an alternatemeans may be used. A leg brace willwork; it can be concealed under clothesand allows the leg to be locked intoone position. Shock belts are alsobeing utilized in some courts. Thisdevice is also worn under the clothing.The shock belt is a remotely controlled

device that can be activated by theofficer. Should a prisoner becomeviolent or try to escape, the device isactivated and delivers a high voltageshock, which disables the prisoner.There is some controversysurrounding the use of this.

Whether we are transporting Class Cmisdemeanors or convicted felons, weshould always take the time to plan thetransport and take all the precautionsnecessary to ensure officer safety andthe safety and well-being of thepublic. Although it is not ourresponsibility to provide first classaccommodations to prisoners, we areobligated to ensure their safety andsecurity. If we keep these things inmind as we go about our daily jobs, wewill reduce liability and ensure thesafety of everyone.B

Dates School Hotel/City Address & Telephone

3/24-25/04 12-Hour Regional Judges/Clerks Sofitel Houston 425 N. Sam Houston Pkwy 77060281/445-9000

3/30-31/04 Fines & Fees Collections The San Luis Resort Galveston 5222 Seawall Boulevard 78040409/744-1500

4/7-8/04 12-Hour Regional Judges/Clerks Ambassador Hotel Amarillo 3100 I-40 West 79102806/358-6161

5/4-5/04 12-Hour Prosecutors Radisson Resort South Padre Island 500 Padre Blvd. 78597956/761-6511

5/6-7/04 12-Hour Clerks Radisson Resort South Padre Island 500 Padre Blvd. 78597956/761-6511

5/10-11/04 12-Hour Attorney Judges Radisson Resort South Padre Island 500 Padre Blvd. 78597956/761-6511

5/12-13/04 12-Hour Non-Attorney Judges Radisson Resort South Padre Island 500 Padre Blvd. 78597956/761-6511

6/15-16/04 Special Topics Judges (Magistrate)/ Hyatt Regency Austin 208 Barton Springs 78704Court Administrators 512/477-1234

6/24-25/04 Bailiffs and Warrant Officers Inn of the Hills Kerrville 1001 Junction Highway 78028830/895-5000

7/6-7/04 12-Hour Regional Judges/Clerks Camino Real El Paso 101 S. El Paso Street 79901915/534-3000

7/19-23/04 32-Hour New Judges/Clerks Lakeway Inn Austin 101 Lakeway Drive 78734512/261-6600

7/30-8/1/04 Level III Clerk Certification Doubletree Dallas 8250 North Central Exprsway 75206Assessment Clinic Campbell Centre 214/691-8700


TMCEC 2003-2004 REGISTRATION FORM

Program Attending: ________________________________ Program Dates: _____________________________ [city]

r I will attend the pre-conference class on Bond Forfeitures. r I will attend the New Prosecutor Trial Advocacy track at the Prosecutor Skills Seminar.

r Judge r Clerk r Court Administrator r Bailiff/Warrant Officer* r Prosecutor

TMCEC computer data is updated from the information you provide. Please print legibly and fill out form completely.

Last Name: _______________________________ First Name: _____________________________ MI: ________Names also known by: ______________________________________________ Male/Female: ______________Position held: __________________________________________________________________________________Date Appointed/Elected/Hired: _____________________________________ Years Experience: ________________Emergency Contact: ___________________________________________________________________________

HOUSING INFORMATIONTMCEC will make all hotel reservations from the information you provide on this form. TMCEC will pay for a single occupancyroom at all seminars: four nights at the 32-hour seminars and two nights at the 12-hour seminars. To share with another seminarparticipant, you must indicate that person’s name on this form.

r I need a private, single-occupancy room.r I need a room shared with a seminar participant. Please indicate roommate by entering seminar participant’s name:

_______________________________________________ (Room will have 2 double beds.)r I need a private double-occupancy room, but I’ll be sharing with a guest. (I will pay additional cost, if any, per night.)

I will require: r 1 king bed r 2 double bedsr I do not need a room at the seminar.

Date arriving: ____________________ Arriving by: r Car r Airplane r Smoker r Non-Smoker

COURT MAILING ADDRESSIt is TMCEC’s policy to mail all correspondence directly to the court address.

Municipal Court of: _________________________ Mailing Address: _______________________________________________City: _____________________________________ Zip Code: ___________________ Email: ________________________Office Telephone #: _________________________ Court #: _________________________ FAX #: ____________________Primary City Served: _________________________ Other Cities Served: ____________________________________________

r Attorney r Non-Attorney r Full Time r Part Time

Status: r Presiding Judge r Associate/Alternate Judge r Justice of the Peace r Mayorr Court Clerk r Deputy Clerk r Court Administrator r Bailiff/Warrant Officer*r Prosecutorr Assessment Clinic (A registration fee of $100 must accompany registration form.)r Other: ______________________________________________

*Warrant Officers/Bailiffs: Municipal judge’s signature required to attend Bailiff/Warrant Officers program:

Judge’s Signature _______________________________________ Date: ___________________________Municipal Court of ________________________________________________________________________

I certify that I am currently serving as a municipal judge, city prosecutor, or court support personnel in the State of Texas. I agree that I will be responsible for any costsincurred if I do not cancel five (5) working days prior to the seminar. If I have requested a room, I certify that I live at least 30 miles from the seminar site and have readthe cancellation and no show policies in the General Seminar Information section located on pages 16-17 in the Academic Schedule. Payment is required ONLY for theassessment clinics; payment is due with registration form. Participants in the assessment clinics must cancel in writing two weeks prior to seminar to receive refund.

_____________________________________________________ __________________________ Participant Signature Date


TEXAS MUNICIPAL COURTSEDUCATION CENTER

1609 SHOAL CREEK BLVD., SUITE 302AUSTIN, TX 78701www.tmcec.com

TMCEC MISSIONSTATEMENT

To provide high quality judicialeducation, technical assistance,and the necessary resource ma-terial to assist municipal courtjudges, court support personnel,and prosecutors in obtaining andmaintaining professional compe-tence.

Change Service Requested

Pre-Conference Prior to TMCECRegional 12-Hour Conferences

TMCEC is pleased to announce a special pre-conference on Bond Forfeitures before many of the regional 12-hourconferences. The workshop-format class is held from 1-5 p.m. the day before the 12-hour conferences (not offeredin South Padre). Dates and locations are listed below. Local prosecutors may also attend. Judges and court supportpersonnel from the local area may attend the pre-conference class even if they are not attending the 12-hourprogram.

Please register for the pre-conference on the registration form on page 27 of this newsletter. THERE IS NOREGISTRATION FEE.

Date ofPre-Conference Program Hotel Hotel Address

3/23/04 12-Hour Regional Judges/Clerks Sofitel Houston 425 N. Sam Houston Pkwy 77060281/445-9000

4/6/04 12-Hour Regional Judges/Clerks Ambassador Hotel Amarillo 3100 I-40 West 79102806/358-6161

6/14/04 Special Topics Judges (Magistrate) Hyatt Regency Austin 208 Barton Springs 78704/Court Administrators 512/477-1234

7/5/04 12-Hour Regional Judges/Clerks Camino Real El Paso 101 S. El Paso Street 79901915/534-3000

focus on bail bond forfeitures - tmcec :: home recorder/2004/nl_0304… · and court security...

Documents