AG Opinions

February 26, 2021

Legislative News

  • Share this:

TAC has highlighted recent attorney general opinions and requests for opinions of interest to counties.

Attorney General Opinions

KP-0354: Punishment for a violation of the maximum vehicle weight limit established by the executive director of the Texas Department of Transportation under Transportation Code section 621.102 (RQ-0373-KP). Punishment for a violation of the maximum vehicle weight limit established under Transportation Code section 621.102.

KP-0355: Whether a conflict of interest exists under chapter 171 of the Local Government Code when a city council member votes to waive interest on delinquent property taxes accrued by an unrelated person under particular circumstances (RQ-0374-KP). Local Government Code section 171.004(a) conflict of interest requirements do not apply to a city council member voting on a county matter even though the council member is married to the county tax assessor-collector.

KP-0356: Boundary line between the High Plains Underground Water Conservation District and the Panhandle Groundwater Conservation District (RQ-0375-KP). An appraisal district may not determine or correct the boundaries of a taxing unit. With respect to the potential boundaries presented by the High Plains Underground Water Conservation District and the Panhandle Groundwater Conservation District, the determination of the exact boundary line between them in Potter County will involve the resolution of fact issues and is outside the purview of an attorney general opinion.

KP-0357: Jurisdiction of a criminal district attorney to prosecute federal officials who violate criminal provisions of the Election Code (RQ-0376-KP). Determining whether authority exists to prosecute in any specific situation requires multiple factual determinations, which are outside the scope of the opinion process of this office.

The Sixth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and article 33.03 of the Code of Criminal Procedure establish a right of the accused to be present in the courtroom through the conclusion of trial proceedings. Under article 33.03, an accused’s right to be present at his trial is un-waivable even by the accused until such a time as the jury has been selected.