I am working on two different an unrelated issues I could use some help on -- Thanks in advance for your words of wisdom:

1. Our Commissioners Court is in a tizzy because they have "discovered" that our county court and district courts take a different approach to collection of fines and fees assessed in criminal cases. The District Court limits the amount of jail credit allowed for fines and court costs, but show a low collection rate (surprise!). The County Court at Law nearly always allows jail credit for fines and fees due, and its collection rate is therefore very high. The Commissioners want the courts to collect the maximum amount of actual cash with the minimum expenditure possible, and are therefore asking when jail credit MUST be given for fines and costs. There are a lot of policy issues involved in this issue, but the legal question is whether an inmate who owes only money to the court and has served time in jail must be given credit for the fines and costs? Opinions please.

2. One of our local constables has asked me the following:

I PARTICIPATED IN A CONTINUING EDUCATION CLASS FOR CONSTABLES AT SAM HOUSTON STATE UNIVERSITY IN NOVEMBER 2007. IN A DISCUSSION WITH ANOTHER CONSTABLE, SHE SAID HER DEPARTMENT CHECKED ON REGISTERED SEX OFFENDERS RESIDENCY. SHE ONLY CHECKS ON THE RESIDENCE, HOWEVER, SHE DOES NOT FOLLOW UP WITH PROSECUTION.
I HAVE ATTEMPTED TO LOCATE IN THE CODE THE AUTHORITY TO CHECK ON THE REGISTERED SEX OFFENDER�S RESIDENCY. I HAVE BEEN UNABLE TO CLEARLY DETERMINE THAT AUTHORITY AND/OR WHO IS CHARGED WITH THE VERIFICATION THAT THE OFFENDERS DO, IN FACT, RESIDE AT THE LOCATION LISTED IN THE REGISTRATION.

MY CONCERNS REVOLVE AROUND SEVERAL ISSUES: FIRST- WHERE IN THE CODE IS ANY OFFICER AUTHORIZED, OR CHARGED WITH THE RESPONSIBILITY TO VERIFY THE INFORMATION PROVIDED AT THE TIME OF REGISTRATION BY THE OFFENDER? [ I UNDERSTAND THE KNOCK AND TALK CONCEPT, BUT AT WHAT POINT DOES THE INQUIRY BECOME AN INVESTIGATION?] SECOND- WHAT ELEMENTS OF VERIFICATION WILL THE COURT REQUIRE TO ESTABLISH THE VIOLATION EXISTS? THIRD- IF THE AUTHORITY TO VERIFY THE RESIDENCY DOES EXIST, WILL THAT AUTHORITY ALSO EXTEND TO THE OFFENDERS THAT ARE CHARGED WITH SEX OFFENSES AND HAVE BEEN RELEASED ON BOND, WITH SEX OFFENDER CONDITIONS ATTACHED?


Thanks for your help!

Ilse

Can't help you with question 1 but Section 62.051(g) should answer question 2.

"(g) A person who is required to register or verify
registration under this chapter shall ensure that the person's
registration form is complete and accurate with respect to each
item of information required by the form in accordance with
Subsection (c)."

How about this:

Art. 62.058. LAW ENFORCEMENT VERIFICATION OF REGISTRATION
INFORMATION.

(d) A local law enforcement authority designated as a
person's primary registration authority by the department may at any time mail a nonforwardable verification form to the last reported address of the person. Not later than the 21st day after receipt of a verification form under this subsection, the person
shall:
(1) indicate on the form whether the person still resides at the last reported address and, if not, provide on the
form the person's new address;
(2) complete any other information required by the form;
(3) sign the form; and
(4) return the form to the authority.

As to question no. 1, the discretionary provisions of CCP Art. 43.03 and 43.09 allow the courts to make that decision. However, in a misdemeanor case, under Art. 43.09 (a), the judge must give $50.00 per day credit for each day served in jail.