Defendant is arrested for DWI, and is magistrated and bonds out. That case is filed in county court at law.

He subsequently is arrested again for DWI. Magistrate does not put any bond conditions on Defendant at the time of the warning on the 2nd arrest. Trial court judge learns of this, probably when 2nd DWI is also filed in the same court. Can the judge of the court in which the cases are filed add bond conditions, sua sponte, of an interlock or SCRAM unit as a condition of bond if it was not originally put on by the JP that magistrated the person?

Good Question -

Jurisdiction technically remains with the JP. On the other hand, when transferred to the County court or District Court (by information or indictment), the new court has jurisdiction. Now, as a matter of practicality, the JP, assuming he has jurisdiction, or the trial court, is under no obligation to set conditions at the time of fixing bail. The statute is permissive. The Code doesn't set a time limit on the judge's authority over in the bond. In fact, if you look at 17.09, CCrP, the judge can, sua sponte, determine that the bail is insufficient, revoke the bail, and cause the defendant to be arrested again. The defendant may be forced to make a higher bail. This, at a minimum, implies the authority to later determine conditions are insufficient, and to add as the Code permits (or just revoke and start again. What defendant wants that?).

With those thoughts in mind, as long as the judge has authority, I don't believe he or she is prohibited from later setting conditions on the bond.

I have seen some jurisdictions with standing orders for the District and County Courts to act as examining courts in all cases of bond. Legitimate? I guess no one has filed a write lately to see........

I would have just said Yes.

I would've just said yes as well.

Yes.