Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion ( 1989 )


Menu:
  •               THE    ATTORNEY           GENERAL
    OF    TEXAS
    September 21, 1989
    Honorable Charles 0. Penick     Opinion No. JM-log8
    Criminal District Attorney
    Bastrop County                  Re: Authority of a commission-
    804 Pecan Street                ers court to promulgate regula-
    Bastrop, Texas 78602            tions regarding smoking in the
    county jail, and related  gues-
    tions  (RQ-1752)
    Dear Mr. Penick:
    You advise that the commissioners court is building   a
    new county jail in Bastrop County and "is attempting to make
    rules concerning  not allowing anyone, including     inmates
    incarcerated  in the jail,     to smoke anywhere    in   the
    building."
    In connection with the     foregoing scenario you ask   the
    following questions:
    1. Does the Commissioner's Court have the
    authority to regulate whether inmates of the
    jail may smoke or does this authority    lie
    solely in the discretion of the Sheriff?
    2. Does smoking in d county jail by
    inmates constitute a hazard to nonsmoking
    inmates?
    May smoking by     inmates be   prohibited
    in i*county jail?
    4. What rules may be dictated to the
    Sheriff by the Commissioner's Court concern-
    ing the operation of the jail?       Is their
    legal authority only to prov~ide the jail and
    adequate funding to operate it?
    5. What remedy would the Commissioner's
    Court have against the Sheriff if a broad
    operational guide line for the operation  of
    the jail was set by the Commissionergs Court
    p. 5751
    Honorable Charles D. Penick - Page 2     (JM-1098)
    and the Sheriff did    not abide by the     guide--
    lines?
    In Wilson v. Lvnauah, 
    878 F.2d 846
    (5th Cir. 1989), the
    Fifth Circuit rejected a prison inmate's claim that exposure
    to environmental tobacco smoke violated his Eighth Amendment
    right to be free from cruel and unusual            punishment.
    However, we do not believe this holding can be construed     to
    vest an inmate or anyone else with a constitutional right to
    smoke in a jail or a prison.      Section 48.01 of the Penal
    Code makes it an offense to smoke tobacco in public    primary
    and secondary    schools, elevators,    enclosed theaters    or
    movie-houses, libraries, museums, hospitals, transit    system
    buses, or intrastate buses. Attorney General Opinion JM-737
    (1987) concluded    that an ordinance by a home-rule      city
    prohibiting smoking in public places was not violative       of
    any state law.     Prison officials are not required to meet
    health   and safety standards     for persons who are      not
    incarcerated.   uq                
    693 F.2d 566
    , 569 (5th Cir.
    1982). Granting     an inmate the right to smoke would be
    ironic when such privilege is often denied non-incarcerated
    citizens.
    You ask whether the authority to regulate the smoking
    'by inmates is within the province of the commissioners court
    or the sheriff.  Former article 5115, V.T.C.S., required the
    commissioners court to provide   a "safe and suitable   jail."
    Article 5115 was amended by House Bill 1314, Acts 1987, 70th
    Leg., ch. 883, § 1, effective September    1, 1987, and such
    amendment was carried   forward and given effect as part of
    section 351.001 of the Local Government Code. The amendment
    contains detailed provisions   defining the responsibilities
    of the commissioners court in providing "safe and suitable
    jails." Among the requirements with which the commissioners
    court is charged is the responsibility of providing the jail
    with proper  sanitation, ventilation,   cleanliness,   health,
    adequate security and safety conditions.     The question   of
    whether the commissioners court has authority to determine
    if county jail inmates smoke turns on whether           it is
    necessary to impose such a regulation to comply with the
    commissioners court's responsibility under section    351.001.
    The resolution  of this question     is dependent    upon the
    circumstances existing in a particular county jail and must
    be resolved on a case-by-case basis. Such a factual determ-
    ination is not within the province of the opinion process.
    Section 351.041 of the Local Government Code  (formerly
    article  5116, V.T.C.S.)   designates  the sheriff   as the
    p. 5752
    Honorable Charles D. Penick - Page 3 (JM-1098)
    "keeper of the county jail" and provides he shall "exercise
    supervision and control over the jail." In Attorney General
    Opinion H-1190 (1978) it was stated that under then article
    5116 the authority of the commissioners court over the jail
    is limited to providing the jail adequate funding and broad
    operational guidelines, and that the actual operation of the
    jail is the responsibility of the sheriff.
    Attorney General Opinion H-1190 stated that under then
    article 5116 the authority to supervise, direct and control
    the jail is vested in the office of the sheriff. Whirl
    Kerq, 
    407 F.2d 781
    (5th Cir. 1968), addressed the responsXl
    bilities of the sheriff as keeper of the jail. In Whirl    it
    was stated "the statutory obligations of a Texas sheriff are
    not amorphous    ones . . . . Article     5116 places     the
    responsibility for the county jail directly upon the county
    sheriff . . . .'I 
    Id. at 794-795.
       We are of the opinion
    that the sheriff as "keeper of the county jail" has the
    discretion to make any reasonable rules relative to super-
    vision of prisoners and the operation of the jail, including
    whether smoking is allowed  in the jail.   In the event the
    sheriff should permit smoking in the jail, the commissioners
    court may only prohibit same if it falls within its respons-
    ibility of providing   a "safe and suitable     jail" under
    section 351.001 of the Local Government Code.1
    We cannot address your second question because     it
    requires the resolution   of fact issues.  Also, Attorney
    General Opinions address specific legal questions.  We 'do
    not provide  the type of general legal advice that your
    fourth and fifth questions call for. Therefore, we do not
    answer those questions.
    1. Section     351.002   states   that   the   standards
    prescribed  by this subchapter     are "minimum standards."
    Article 5115.1, V.T.C.S.,    vests the Commission    on Jail
    Standards with authority to promulgate      reasonable  rules
    relative to construction and operation of jails,    including
    establishing minimum   standards for the custody,   care and
    treatment of prisoners.   Section  351.002 provides that the
    county jail must comply with the minimum standards and the
    rules and procedures of the Commission on Jail Standards.
    p. 5753
    Honorable Charles D. Penick - Page 4    (JM-1098)
    SUMMARY
    The sheriff as "keeper of the county
    jail" has the discretion to make reasonable
    regulations relative to the supervision     of
    prisoners and operation of the jail, includ-
    ing the authority     to determine     whether
    smoking should be allowed  in the jail.    The
    county commissioners    court may     prohibit
    smoking by inmates in the county jail if it
    falls within its responsibility to provide   a
    "safe and suitable     jail" under     section
    351.001 of the Local Government Code.
    JIM     .MATTOX
    Attorney General of Texas
    MARY KELLER
    First Assistant Attorney General
    LOU MCCREARY
    Executive Assistant Attorney General
    JUDGE ZOLLIE STEAKLEY
    Special Assistant Attorney General
    RICK GILPIN
    Chairman, Opinion Committee
    Prepared by Tom G. Davis
    Assistant Attorney General
    p. 5754
    

Document Info

Docket Number: JM-1098

Judges: Jim Mattox

Filed Date: 7/2/1989

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 2/18/2017