Opinion

Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion

Court
Texas Attorney General Reports
Filed
Jul 2, 1974
Status
Published
On the bench
John Hill
Cited by
0 cases
Authority
More cited than 3.5%

The opinion

TIE A4m~~~~~G~~~~~~A

OF-TEXAS

AUSTIN. -rExAs 787ll

November 18. 1974

The Honorable W. .I. Estelle. Jr. Opinion No. H- 451

Director

Texas Department of Corrections Re: Whether prison inmate is

Huntsville, Texas 77340 subject to discipline for

infraction committed while

Dear Mr. Estelle: on emergency reprieve.

You have requested an opinion from us as to whether

. . . an inmate of Texas Department of Corrections

is subject to disciplinary action by The Department

of Corrections under its rules and regulations while

he is on a Board of Pardons and Paroles reprieve to

a hospital, some other institution, or a funeral, or

is his conduct subject only to other authorities under

other legal provisions?

The Board has established a procedure through which inmates of the

Texas Department of Corrections may be granted permission to leave

those facilities to obtain medical care, and to attend to critical illness

or deaths within the inmate’s immediate family. Board of Pardons and

Paroles, Handbook on Parole and Executive Clemency in Texas at pp. 112-

114 (1970). In your letter you speak of such procedures as “reprieves. I’

There is no constitutional nor statutory definition of reprieve. Texas

cases have described it as a postponement of the execution of the sentence

to a day certain. Snodgrass v. State, 150 S. W. 162, 165 (Tex. Crim.App.

1912). It has been said that it is the withdrawing of a sentence for an

interval of time, that it does not and cannot defeat the ultimate execution

of the judgment of the court, and that the period of a reprieve is not to

be counted upon service of the person’s prison term nor credit given

therefor. Ex parte Black, 59 S. W. 2d 828, 829 (Tex. Crim. App. 1933). In

view of these authorities we believe that in cases other than capital, a

reprieve contemplates temporary freedom from custody or supervision.

po 2079

The Honorable W. J. Estelle, Jr., page 2 (H-451)

Thus it is our opinion that an inmate on reprieve is removed from the

custody and supervision of the Texas Department of Corrections, and he

may receive no credit on his sentence during the period of the reprieve.

However, this time may be commuted, Handbook on Parole and Executive

Clemency in Texas at p. 104 (1970). The reprieve completely suspends

the Department’s authority over the inmate, and thus the Department

has no basis on which to discipline him for conduct during the reprieve

period. However, he would of course be subject to prosecution for criminal

acts committed during the period, and is subject to arrest and return to

prison should he fail to return upon expiration of the reprieve. Ex parte

Brown, 220 S. W. 2d 154 (Tex. Grim. App. 1949).

It is unclear from your opinion request if the situation about which you

have asked - that is, where an inmate is temporarily beyond the immediate

facilities of TDC for medical treatment or to attend a funeral - is actually

a reprieve with the attendant. consequences described above. If the inmate

who is temporarily beyond TDC facilities is receiving credit on his sentence

for the time spent outside TDC facilities and is within the custody and control

of TDC personnel, then the inmate is not, in our opinion, on reprieve.

We believe that TDC may exercise its custody and~control over inmates

beyond the immediate confines of the prison in certain instances, and in

such instances the inmates may remain subject to disciplinary action by

the TDC.

Article 6166a. V. T. C. S., states that inmates shall have humane treat-

ment. Article 6166g, V. T. C. S., provides that the Texas Board of

Corrections together with the Director of TDC shall be responsible for the

“proper care, treatment, feeding, clothing and rmnagement of the prisoners

confined therein. ” Several cases have held that prison authorities in fact

have an affirmative duty to provide medical care for inmates. See Camp-

bell v. Beto, 460 F. 2d 765 (5th Cir. 1972), Taylor v. Sterrett, 344 F. Supp.

411 (N. D. Tex.. 1972), aff’d. in part, vacated in part, and remanded, 499

F. 2d 367 (5th Cir. 1974).

In some instances, it may be reasonable and necessary for the Depart-

ment to exercise its custody and control over a prisoner in need of proper

medical care by placing the inmate in a medical facility outside the prison

and making reasonable provision or arrangements for supervision of the

inmate in that context.

p. 2080

The Honorable W. J. Estelle, Jr., page 3 (H-451)

In our opinion, “humane treatment” certainly includes adequate

medical care, and arguably is broad enough to encompass permitting

attendance at sick beds or funerals of immediate family. In such cases,

the inmate would remain a prisoner, subject to all applicable rules and

regulations of the Department, and would be subject to disciplinary

action by the Department even though not within the immediate confines

of the prison. However, beyond provision of medical care, we believe

this is an appropriate area for legislative standards and guidelines.

+, for example, Article 6166x-3, V. T. C.S., providing for work

furloughs.

See also Letter Advisory No. 12 (1973), in which this office advised

that Senate Bill 373 of the 63rd Legislature, which would have allowed

TDC to grant temporary furloughs to inmates for the purpose of obtaining

medical treatment or of attending to family emergencies was not unconsti-

tutional since the temporary furloughs were not reprieves, commutations

of punishment, pardons, or paroles, over which the Governor and the

Board of Pardons and Paroles have been given exclusive jurisdiction by

the Constitution. In Letter Advisory No. 12 this office relied on the fact

that the Department would exercise proper security and custody precautions.

SUMMARY

An inmate beyond the immediate confines of the

prison for special purposes not amounting to a reprieve

remains a prisoner subject to the Department’s rules

and regulations and to its security and custody pre-

cautions.

Very truly yours,

Attorney General of Texas

pe 2081

The Honorable W. J. Estelle, Jr., page 4 (H-451)

DAVID M. KENDALL, Chairman

Opinion Committee

p. 2082

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.