Who has to bring a fugitive back to Texas from another state, and who pays for it?

Plain-English summary

A Bosque County Attorney asked the AG a practical question that comes up when someone wanted on a Texas warrant is caught in another state: who has to go get them, the city police department that obtained the warrant or the county sheriff, and can the county be reimbursed for the trip? The AG answered the general legal framework but did not resolve the specific dispute, because the request gave too little detail.

The starting point is the reach of a Texas arrest warrant. Under article 15.06 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, a warrant extends to "any part of the State," and within Texas a sheriff can be obligated to fetch a person arrested in another county. But that authority runs only inside Texas. As a rule, a warrant issued in one state cannot be executed in another. So a Texas arrest warrant, standing alone, does not require any Texas peace officer to travel across state lines to take custody.

When the person is in another state, interstate extradition takes over, and that is governed by three layers of law: the Extradition Clause of the U.S. Constitution, federal statutes (which say the costs of an extradition proceeding are paid by the demanding authority), and Texas chapter 51 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, including the Uniform Criminal Extradition Act. Under that chapter, the Governor commissions a "suitable person" as the agent to receive the fugitive and bring them back to the county where the offense was allegedly committed. That commissioned agent, not the warrant itself, carries the duty. On expenses, the AG pointed to two routes: the State Treasury can pay the agent's actual and necessary travel expenses on the Governor's certificate (article 51.10, section 1), or the commissioners court of the county may, in its discretion and on the sheriff's request with the prosecutor's recommendation, pay them from county funds (article 51.10, section 2, and the parallel UCEA provision in article 51.13). Because the request did not say who was named as the Governor's agent, the AG said it could not decide who bore the duty or the reimbursement in this particular case.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 2016. Subsequent statutory amendments, court decisions, or later AG opinions may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context, not current legal advice. Verify current law before relying on any specific rule, deadline, or remedy mentioned here. Chapter 51 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and the federal extradition statutes may have been amended since 2016, so confirm the current law before relying on these specifics.

What the opinion meant for those who asked

The Bosque County Attorney and others facing the same question (as the opinion described it): The opinion explained the general framework but expressly declined to decide, on the limited facts provided, whether the city police department or the county sheriff bore responsibility in the specific case, stating it expressed "no opinion regarding the specific circumstances."

Sheriffs and peace officers (as the opinion described it): The opinion described a Texas arrest warrant under article 15.06 as effective only within Texas, so the warrant by itself imposed no duty to travel out of state; the duty in another state turned on state and federal extradition law.

The Governor's commissioned agent (as the opinion described it): The opinion identified the person commissioned by the Governor in the extradition requisition as the one with responsibility to receive and return the out-of-state arrestee to the county of the alleged offense.

Counties weighing the cost (as the opinion described it): The opinion described two payment routes for the agent's actual and necessary travel expenses, the State Treasury under article 51.10, section 1, or the commissioners court's discretionary payment under article 51.10, section 2, and article 51.13, and noted that identifying the Governor's agent had to come before deciding who reimbursed that agent.

Common questions

Does a Texas arrest warrant let police go arrest someone in another state?
No. The AG concluded a warrant under article 15.06 reaches only within Texas, so it does not by itself authorize or require any officer to execute it across state lines.

Who actually brings the fugitive back to Texas?
The AG explained that under chapter 51, the person the Governor commissions in the extradition requisition has the duty to receive and return the arrestee to the county where the offense was allegedly committed.

Did the AG say whether the city or the county was responsible here?
No. The AG expressly declined to decide the specific question on the limited facts, saying it expressed no opinion on the circumstances of the case.

Who pays the cost of an interstate extradition trip?
The AG noted the agent's actual and necessary travel expenses may be paid from the State Treasury on the Governor's certificate (article 51.10, section 1) or, at the commissioners court's discretion, from county funds on the sheriff's request and the prosecutor's recommendation (article 51.10, section 2, and article 51.13).

Who bears the cost under federal law?
The AG noted federal law provides that all costs incurred in an extradition proceeding to apprehend, secure, and transmit a fugitive are paid by the demanding authority.

Background and statutory framework

A Texas arrest warrant under article 15.06 of the Code of Criminal Procedure extends to any part of the State, and within Texas a sheriff may be obligated to retrieve a person arrested in another county (Tex. Code Crim. Proc. arts. 15.06, 15.18, 15.20). That authority, however, applies only in Texas; a warrant issued in one state generally cannot be executed in another (Street v. Cherba, 662 F.2d 1037). Interstate extradition is instead governed by the Extradition Clause (U.S. Const. art. IV, § 2, cl. 2), federal statutes (18 U.S.C. § 3182; costs under 18 U.S.C. § 3195), and Texas chapter 51 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, including the Uniform Criminal Extradition Act.

Under chapter 51, the Governor commissions a suitable person to take the requisition and return the fugitive to the county of the alleged offense (Tex. Code Crim. Proc. art. 51.09). The agent's actual and necessary travel expenses may be paid by the State Treasury on the Governor's certificate or, at the commissioners court's discretion, from county funds on the sheriff's request and the prosecutor's recommendation (Tex. Code Crim. Proc. arts. 51.10, 51.13). Because the request did not identify the Governor's agent or how the extradition was carried out, the AG advised only generally and declined to resolve the specific duty and reimbursement question.

Citations

Constitutional and statutory provisions:

• U.S. Const. art. IV, § 2, cl. 2 (Extradition Clause)
• 18 U.S.C. § 3182 (federal extradition procedure)
• 18 U.S.C. § 3195 (costs paid by the demanding authority)
• Tex. Code Crim. Proc. art. 15.06 (reach of an arrest warrant within Texas)
• Tex. Code Crim. Proc. art. 15.18 (procedural requirements for out-of-county arrests)
• Tex. Code Crim. Proc. art. 15.20 (sheriff's duty to retrieve an out-of-county arrestee)
• Tex. Code Crim. Proc. art. 51.09 (Governor commissions a suitable person to take a requisition)
• Tex. Code Crim. Proc. art. 51.10 (payment of the agent's travel expenses)
• Tex. Code Crim. Proc. art. 51.13 (Uniform Criminal Extradition Act; county payment provision)

Cases:

• Street v. Cherba, 662 F.2d 1037, 1039 (4th Cir. 1981)

Source

• Landing page: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/opinions/ken-paxton/kp-0067
• Original PDF: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/2016/kp0067.pdf

Original opinion text

Best-effort transcription from the official PDF. Minor extraction artifacts were corrected; the linked PDF is authoritative.

KEN PAXTON
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS

February 16, 2016

The Honorable Natalie C. Koehler Opinion No. KP-0067
Bosque County Attorney
Post Office Box 215 Re: County responsibilities regarding interstate
Meridian, Texas 76665 extradition (RQ-0050-KP)

Dear Ms. Koehler:

You ask which entity, as between a city police department and a county sheriff's office, "bear[s] responsibility for extradition across state lines" in connection with the transportation of a person located outside the State back to Texas pursuant to an arrest warrant. [1] You also ask whether the county, if it is determined to bear this responsibility, may "be reimbursed by the agency who requested the warrant." Request Letter at 1. Based on the limited background information provided, we confine our discussion to (1) the general duty created by an arrest warrant with respect to a person arrested outside the State; and (2) the costs associated with interstate extradition, and we express no opinion regarding the specific circumstances in your case. See Request Letter at 1; Email at 1.

The Texas Code of Criminal Procedure article 15.06 provides as follows:

A warrant of arrest, issued by any county or district clerk, or by any magistrate ... shall extend to any part of the State; and any peace officer to whom said warrant is directed, or into whose hands the same has been transferred, shall be authorized to execute the same in any county in this State.

TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. art. 15.06. If a person is arrested in a different county from the one in which the warrant was issued and the person does not post bail as provided in article 15.18 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the sheriff, after receiving notice, is obligated to "go or send for the arrested person and have the arrested person brought before the proper court or magistrate." Id. art. 15.20; see also id. arts. 15.18 (procedural requirements for out-of-county arrests), 15.19 (notification to sheriff); Tex. Att'y Gen. Op. No. LO-92-67, at 2 (construing article 15.20 to obligate the sheriff to transport an arrested person back from a distant county even when the warrant is obtained by a city police department). The authority to execute an arrest warrant pursuant to article 15.06, however, is applicable only "in this State." TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. art. 15.06; see generally Street v. Cherba, 662 F.2d 1037, 1039 (4th Cir. 1981) ("[g]enerally, an arrest warrant issued in one state may not be lawfully executed in another"). Thus, an arrest warrant, by itself, does not impose a duty on a sheriff or any other peace officer of this State to travel out of state to take custody of the person named in the warrant. Instead, the duty, if any, to take custody in another State is governed by state and federal extradition law.

The interstate extradition of fugitives is controlled by the United States Constitution, federal law, and state law. The Extradition Clause of the U.S. Constitution provides that

[a] person charged in any State with Treason, Felony, or other Crime, who shall flee from Justice, and be found in another State, shall on Demand of the executive Authority of the State from which he fled, be delivered up, to be removed to the State having Jurisdiction of the Crime.

U.S. CONST. art. IV, § 2, cl. 2. Congress has implemented this constitutional provision in federal law, providing that

[w]henever the executive authority of any State ... demands any person as a fugitive from justice, of the executive authority of any State ... to which such person has fled, and produces a copy of an indictment found or an affidavit made before a magistrate of any State ..., charging the person demanded with having committed treason, felony, or other crime, certified as authentic by the governor or chief magistrate of the State ... from whence the person so charged has fled, the executive authority of the State ... to which such person has fled shall cause him to be arrested and secured, and notify the executive authority making such demand, or the agent of such authority appointed to receive the fugitive, and shall cause the fugitive to be delivered to such agent when he shall appear. If no such agent appears within thirty days from the time of the arrest, the prisoner may be discharged.

18 U.S.C. § 3182. With respect to costs, Congress has provided that "[a]ll costs or expenses incurred in any extradition proceeding in apprehending, securing, and transmitting a fugitive shall be paid by the demanding authority." Id. § 3195.

The State of Texas has further implemented the Extradition Clause through general extradition provisions as well as through the adoption of the Uniform Criminal Extradition Act ("UCEA"), both located in chapter 51 (Fugitives from Justice) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. See generally TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. arts. 51.01-.14. Pursuant to chapter 51, the Governor may make a demand for the return of a fugitive from another State and assign a person to transport the individual back to Texas, who may then be compensated for his services. For example, under the general provisions,

[w]hen the Governor deems it proper to demand a person who has committed an offense in this State and has fled to another State, he may commission any suitable person to take such requisition. The accused, if brought back to the State, shall be delivered up to the sheriff of the county in which it is alleged he has committed the offense.

Id. art. 51.09. The general provisions contemplate two alternate sources for compensation:

Sec. 1. The officer or person so commissioned shall receive as compensation the actual and necessary traveling expenses upon requisition of the Governor to be allowed by such Governor and to be paid out of the State Treasury upon a certificate of the Governor reciting the services rendered and the allowance therefor.

Sec. 2. The commissioners court of the county where an offense is committed may in its discretion, on the request of the sheriff and the recommendation of the district attorney, pay the actual and necessary traveling expenses of the officer or person so commissioned out of any fund or funds not otherwise pledged.

Id. art. 51.10; see also Tex. Att'y Gen. Op. Nos. V-587 (1948) at 3-4 (construing identical language from the predecessor to article 51.10 and explaining that payment under section 1 is "an obligation of the State" but that "should the State refuse ... then the Commissioners Court may in its discretion pay ... in accordance with Section 2"); V-525 (1948) at 4 (construing the same and noting that the discretion of the commissioners court to pay travel expenses is conditional on the agent having been appointed by the Governor pursuant to statute). Similarly, under the UCEA:

Whenever the Governor of this State shall demand a person charged with crime ... in this State, from the Executive Authority of any other State ... he shall issue a warrant under the state seal, to some agent, commanding him to receive the person so charged if delivered to him and convey him to the proper officer of the county in this State in which the offense was committed, or in which the prosecution for such offense is then pending.

In all cases of extradition, the commissioners court of the county where an offense is alleged to have been committed, or in which the prosecution is then pending may in its discretion, on request of the sheriff and the recommendation of the prosecuting attorney, pay the actual and necessary expenses of the officer or person commissioned to receive the person charged, out of any county fund or funds not otherwise pledged.

TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. art. 51.13 §§ 22, 24. Neither the general provisions nor the UCEA provisions establish any particular eligibility requirements, other than, in the case of article 51.09, that the person be "suitable," to be appointed as the Governor's agent to receive and return a fugitive from another State. Id. art. 51.09.

With regard to your specific question about the duty to transport an arrestee in this case, you provide no further information regarding who was named as the Governor's agent or the manner in which the extradition was carried out. Thus, we can advise only generally that the person with the responsibility to transport an out-of-state arrestee back to the county in which the offense was allegedly committed is the person so commissioned by the Governor in the extradition requisition. With regard to the reimbursement of expenses, the designation of the Governor's agent must necessarily precede a determination of who is responsible for reimbursement of that agent's travel expenses. Thus, under the limited facts presented, we cannot advise about any reimbursement of expenses beyond what is provided under articles 51.10 and 51.13, section 24, of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

SUMMARY

Pursuant to articles 51.09 and 51.13 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, a person commissioned by the Governor in an extradition requisition to receive and return an out-of-state arrestee back to the county in which an offense was allegedly committed has the duty to carry out that responsibility. The actual and necessary expenses of a person so commissioned may be paid pursuant to article 51.10 or article 51.13, section 24, of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

Very truly yours,

KEN PAXTON
Attorney General of Texas

CHARLES E. ROY
First Assistant Attorney General

BRANTLEY STARR
Deputy Attorney General for Legal Counsel

VIRGINIA K. HOELSCHER
Chair, Opinion Committee

BECKY P. CASARES
Assistant Attorney General, Opinion Committee

[1] Letter from Honorable Natalie C. Koehler, Bosque Cty. Att'y, to Honorable Ken Paxton, Tex. Att'y Gen. at 1 (Sept. 9, 2015), https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/opinion/requests-for-opinion-rqs ("Request Letter"); see also Email from Honorable Natalie C. Koehler, Bosque Cty. Att'y, at 1 (Oct. 14, 2015) (on file with the Op. Comm.) ("Email").