C`S /z ~t' 7~ •'7
Item c.7 Consider and disc~..iss req~,~est fur a Warrant Officer
for the Co~_aity Court at Law, tCounty Court at Law Judge>
Co~_inty Coi_mt at I_aw ,judge, Spencer &r-own addressed the COU1^t
on trying to set up a Warrant Officer For the Co~_tnty Court at
Law. The Warrant Officer wo~.~ld be a signed to the Co~~~nty
Court at Law Department co~_~ld investigate and locate
de~Fendants living in the Kerr County area, and once they ar-e
located, could direct Sheriff's Department or F'.errvill.e Police
Department in apprehending them or- 6r-ing them before the
Court. Judge Pr-own suggested setting up a meeting the County
Attorney, two County Commissioners, Sher-iff and himselF and
discuss this item and see if they could get this position for
the next- year's budget.
BACK-UP INFORMATION ON AGENDA REQUEST FROM COUNTY COURT
AT LAW
SUBJECT: WARRANT OFFICER FOR COUNTY COURT AT LAW
County Court at Law needs a warrant officer assigned to it to act as a court bailiff
and serve Alias Capias and Capias Pro Fine warrants on those defendants that do not
appeaz for scheduled court hearings ,and for those that have past due fines and court
costs.
County Court at Law cases have brought in approximately $1,410,385.23 in fine
and court cost fees since January of 1991. This is an average of $235 064.21 per year that
we aze collecting through the CCAL operation, which includes collections by the
Probation Department. (See exhibit C)
The delinquent fine and costs since 1991 are approximately $ 297,362.94 (See
exhibit D). This is an average of $ 49.560.49 per yeaz that CCAL defendants are failing to
pay. There aze approximately $272.354.13 in delinquent fine and costs before 1991, for a
grand total of $569.717.07. (See exhibit "E")
.-- A warrant officer assigned solely to CCAL without any other duties to the
Sheriffs Department would be a valuable asset in the administration of justice in our
court. A warrant officer could investigate and locate many of the defendants still living in
the Kerr County azea, and once they are located, could direct the Sheriff's Department or
Police Department in apprehending them or bringing them before the Court.
Records show that at this time there are approximately 914 unapprehended cases
in County Court at Law alone, which includes 176 probationers who aze at lazge. (See
exhibit A). Defendants whose cases have been disposed of owe approximately
$569.717.07 in past due fines and court costs. (See exhibit B)
The current policy of the Sheriff s office is to enter the warrants ut the TCIC
(Texas Criminal Information Center), and wait and hope the defendant gets stopped on a
traffic offense. The Sheriff's office does actively try to locate some of the defendants, but
because of the other duties imposed on the warrant officer, it makes it almost impossible
to conduct a complete investigation of each and every file. You have to realize that the
Sheriff s Department has four J. P. Courts, the County Court at Law and two District
Court dockets to deal with, in additon to running the jail, investigating current crimes,
patrol and other duties.
The law requires that the State exercise due diligence in trying to locate and
apprehend defendants who have violated their probation. The law is clear that entering
"~ the defendant's name in the TCIC alone is not due diligence, and therefore if and when the
violators are located under the current system, the cases often must be dismissed for lack
of due diligence.
Having a Certified Law Enforcement Officer for this position would be a
plus, but the position does not necessazily require a certified officer. The job could be
handled by either a male or female. Computer experience would be a must. The warrant
officers key role would be to investigate and locate the defendant's whereabouts, and
direct the Sheriff s Department or Police Department in their apprehension.
A warrant officer would also assist in cases where the defendant might be
deceased, in prison or moved out of the state or country, making it unfeasible to continue
to waste the counties resources In locating them. We could clear a lot of old cases in this
manner.
The court coordinators in my office, Kazen Kuhlmann and now Barbara Holmes,
have collected $ 73,440.71 since October of 1993 (see exhibit F) through what we call
financial hearings that are conducted in my office. These hearings are held after a letter is
sent to the defendant requesting that they appeaz and show cause why they have not paid
fine and court costs. Only a small percentage contacted through the mail respond. It is at
this point that we need a warrant officer to follow up and get the individuals
apprehended.
,^
Without a wazrant officer to enforce the Court's judgments, we are becoming
"paper tigers". The word gets out real fast when we don't enforce those judgments and
don't apprehend those who fail to appear In the same token, the word also soon spreads
when people are arrested and jailed for non-payment of fees and failure to appear in court.
We live in a mobile society, and a delay in apprehending those who do not comply makes
it impossible to locate them later on. Usually they can be found within one day after not
appearing, if someone looks for them.
It would probably cost the county aproximately $ 30,826.00 a yeaz to hire a
warrant officer The start-up costs would be approximately $3000.00. (See exhibit "K")
Later the District Courts may want to participate, which would reduce the cost to the
county
Currently we are using a collection agency out of Austin that collects delinquent
fine and costs on a contingency basis. This agency has collected approximately $ 9675.66
since October of 1995. They retain 35% of all money collected. The net gain to the
county was $6289.18 (See exhibit G) It is my understanding this agency merely writes a
threatening letter to the defendant in hopes of getting a response. I don't believe there is
any follow-up if there is no response. In other words, no one goes out and apprehends
them. This is basically what Barbara is now doing through financial hearings, and she is
^ not chazging the county a contingency fee.
A warrant officer would be very valuable to the County Attorney's office in their
efforts to collect hot checks. Once a person is located, they are usually pretty easy to deal
with.
Currently, through the able assistance and hard work ethic of the County
Attorney's staff and the County Clerk's staff, we have been able to maintain an average of
107% of cases disposed compared to cases filed since January 1991. (See exhibit H). The
Court has gone from 975 active criminal cases in January 1991 (see exhibit I), to 342
active cases in March of 1997. (See exhibit J). An average of 140 cases have been filed
each month in the court from January 1991 through December 1996. This of course
means we are cutting away at the backlog cases along with disposing of current cases that
are filed. I might add that we could not do this without the able assistance of our Sheriff
and Probation Departments. We have a great group of people working together at this
time, and a warrant officer would be a valuable asset to this team effort.
Respectfully submitted
Spencer W. Brown
xerr County County Court at Law Monthly Report for March 1997 19:59:27 11 DDR 1997
CRIMINAL SECTION Dage
	~~a~s=:	-amass	ssrmsz--		aa~	masa	s
	1 D	T	D A	T	0	T	\
	\	N	A 5	A	T	0	\
	\ Y	E	U S	A	N	T	\
	----\	F	G A	F	E	A	\
	\ I	T	S U	F	R		\
r~sES a 110CXET \		L	t			\
	1		T	C			\
		asaa_	aa ssr-				a
							
1.	lists bending I	I	I I	I	I	1	I
	First of Month I	2..'"51	6461 731	%l	f151	1651	1321 I
I
2.	Gses Filed 1	1	f 1	1	1	1	1
	Owing Month 1	141	161 111	71	bl	11	W 1
			T~~	~+'			1
							
3.	Cases Appealed 1	I	I I	I	i	I	I
	Fra Lover Gums I	el	a 11	a	el	a	e I
	+:s:s	~+mm'	~+assasmaa+sssnz	9s4aaaa:	asataias	asmM	~s I
•.	Other Gses i	I	I 1	i	I	I	I
	badrial Docket I	I	t I	I	1	l	I
	+ma:a	~+ass:	~+za~asa:+masaas	sa+a::e	mo+~	+	I
L	Motias to AtYOYt 1	i	1 1	I	1	f	1
	1	121	8I 31	41	11	el	36 I
1
0.	All Othv Gses I	I	I I	1	I	I	I
	bactting DecNet 1	et	11 11	11	II	el	e I
3. Tetsl Gses	t 1	I	i	t	I	I I	
am Doehet	i 2511	678;	861	1871	1311	1811 1424 !	
	f.. -__r_	--.	--+	+	-- -r	~ 1	
b. Total	I I	I	I	I	t	1	
Dispositions	I 371	551	161	211	241	161 168 I	
7. Gus bending	I I	I	1	I	I	I I	
Eid of Nanih	1 214{	5151	71f	87.	1161	1641 12`.b I	
	r--+-	+'	-_-+	+	r	+ I	
I~apprshMdsd ~,
3	f 1	I	I	t	I	f I	
~
aH '``	I 1511	5111	421	551	391	1211 it?!
1st	17 of these are
	+ -+~r	--+=	=_+__-	~+	+~	.
+ I	v i a t i o n o f
9. AI1r •f Gses	I ~ days or lrs	s 131 to b8 days I b1 to 9e days	I erer 9e days ITetal Gsas I	probation cases
Dispsed	I 31	I	21 I	11	I 115	I 168 I	
	aNlit+aiHi!#tf#a#aHaai#+fiaaHFH#	HiHf i{4f4+aHaa+ii4iaN4+f!
Patricia Dye, Kerr Gunty Cltrt	a	This Report is a True and Accwate	Reflection of the Records
xarr Gusty Gwthouse	+	of the County Gurt at Law of Kerr	Ceunty +
setreille, n 7eI2e-53e9	s	{~	^ t
	+	~
Drepared Ey /7~L17L__= ~ 1'n .	Fhh. ~4 ~ s
	•	Date H/Il/9~	e
	a	~taaroa+s++taa+:ssraas+ssaaaaasratst+s+a+aa+++*tas++
Exhibit "A"
.N_. ,
._.in; ,. .a _~. PR't: ~. 3':C 199
,.~ : ~ ...
r.rd[n ?otale wage
-Ee vdt.. Fee Comma. Fee Descrip'icn .................... Initial Car. Pal.
~C	5r,	G~,est FEe - C1~ =asas iCGUr.Ly,
_..	MF~::J:	... s~,tV Vii: E.t FPEi
...	er	_..... G.._L:iC~ iT.-.. ._ ._ :
__	._~	Fd:a DGed FP2 ..a.. ~d"sE5 ~EG~~„ fi
_~_	i^.?.u	i~v~`.d t 2
_.	U;~	-aG±as ar `~~'ar:^an. '"e= ,.,,,..r:ty)
__	~ri	_uuiy F3ti-aEj EE
		
		_
__	_n3	~JGRinCli'S`_ ,icCJ~iliY
,
.._	_,a	C'neinal lustic_ G1ar.; i~ g
C	._n	Cleo :: Fee
_.	CCMIt~L	Ctnit~ent and n'eleEEa {Ee
.,..	_	C9MGREHE451VE REtiK'PIC'r"ICQi ~_G'1G"-
._	CJ	2:'i~E St Gr'}~ErS ~_~tat c~
		
-.	:r~	°Er3: LLCrL `r~i~i b. :u'f j ...~dil}'
	'=ifiE	,=inE (Road 8 3rid~ai
		
		
		
		
		
_	,_-..in ._i	.u. :} {.ire>: ._i _~..r~y'i
:
	
Ii'..~.u	_ _
.u w..: ~' O:~.. ~ ~Fi: L'e c>.
.,
	.".	__ CK'r1QCl; LQ6' _..'0'i'~~. .k "9".-_._._°i
		
		
		
		
__	__~	..rErdSOC Ev L`~dG' ~ .~GUr~,,l
		

_	- -
.._	~:' - - -
._t _ rr:: ~_ _ .. ....-
		
--	T~'.,~	-Enas park: o ~ ~„_._.z LAN. ._..c
		
:_	.;CC	VideG Fee ;rc,_..,Y.
~t	mFtL	n_S~E eS FEe ~~,:C;Le-.~:; ,_,, ..'j'
__	JRS	rrf r`i'd{:t ':.Qd ~Lj~
.,.	~Y.:	?
: ,;SrO E^3 - :ti::"
: ~c; .
'
Itt
		1
.
. _
. ~
.
~Z. C.
~ :.', i2
:i a_
°, ~ _2. ~Y
.:i3. '2a
:,, 245. Btu
B1Y2.2d
15, 7D7.0¢
.:. idly
b. ®~
i, 345. D0
~~S.ec
'c D, 332.®3
.,, .
;. C2
., @02.22
C 'i(.7 R
),r ..
l4'2. l':
`.@7,439.62
~, : t'U. L't'
Sk'3.2
35. a~)
., .:_. _1
%i7.
. ~:', i
2, 3J ...
23..'3
.`_d. ~i
7i=.C
sc0.2D
b.¢o
S~,~y5.3a
97s. eti
4, 63i?. ii
`.'J t
10'2..:
-2.i~3
. ,.. z;
5, i9v. 49',*.
1,:D7.?@
12,20
5...
_.. C'P
4. 4 l""
~'?. 2D
..~=.
3,SCL.9°.
.c..'."~
4,D1C.64
322.:0
r` "3. D9
D1.23
o. 23'.
I, 32+7.4'4
6,409.4@
2b, 391.33
4,944. s'3
3,:57.51
9c3._~
' 7, 725. .
1°:. 4:
q 4.^^~, 3D9. ~I~_
~.,_. 4~t
46':. ; ~'
_5.:e
., Y.L. 1 ~
ll5. C4
_, iiJ..
:3. ea0
~[i. $4
._..ss
J ..li
Y9, 41 (. Yd
9. J. 36
:,
_9. ?e'
u2.."i'.
ir.v`2
2'42, Zt
4, Dk'd. '%7
:,0'°.38
10. t'3
i, 4:°,.~
~_. ~rr
?5. E9
664,10.:1
6'.", D9:..:1
: ;E _
{'e::nauert
.i'. r"2
~, 5`15.4:
._~.'2::
4, C's„ 0;
32a. e<~
:~,649.i7
tii..l
6. @.2.
I, 299. c7
E, 961. R0
26,209.36
4, 926.5c
3,IP4.5`_
7=;. ,g
..7,E 10,:,9
._~.D7
4i!0, 729.47
52. e_
~, 4~....
. IS
JS. h."
1,.82. 5..
ES9.44
"~- @4
J,id).9E
".'. 3i
320.98
659. DE
s2 ]. ~6
.,. i l
59,417.52
91~..:.
;,194, 4 7
c9. P3
22@.::
:?, ?Z
~r.j„ d
4,'7u.J7
1 "~~.t•2
5 `~\'. r;
,4.., ~_
~. e::
:5.69
~ .# X64
Exhibit "B"
FINE AND COURT COST COLLECTIONS
	COURT COSTS	FINE	TOTAL
1991	$ 89,831.14	$ 146,543.00	$ 236,374.14
1992	75,219.53	128,300 76	203,520.29
1993	95,854.96	138,243 85	234,098.81
1994	59,47312	61,260.28	120,733.40
	* 40,241.82	* 43,122.b7	* 83.364.49
	99,714 94	104,382.95	204,097.89
1495	32,79608	37,351.23	70,147,31
	* 80.910.90	* ]30,650.98	*211,561.88
	113, 706.98	168,002.21	281, 709.19
1996	28,836.36	32,229.47	61,065,83
	* 51,811.82	* 137.707.26	* 189,519.08
~-	80,648.18	169,936 73	250,584.91
' In June of 1994, the Probatio	n Department also began collecting fine and court costs.
Those figures represent payments made through tha	t office.
TOTAL AMOUNT COLLECTED FROM 1991 THROUGH 1996 ----$1,410,385.23,
AVERAGE PER YEAR---------------$235,064.21,`x'
Exhibit "C"
-Cowty`	~~	CRIMINAL CASE	MANA6ENENT.		29 APR 1997
		Delinquent Fte Report - CUTOfF DATEi 31 DEC 19%		
-z Softwre 6Youq	Inc.	for County Court at Law		Page 2
		DELIIVOUENT FEES REPORT: 1991 THROUGH 1997	
		brand Total	s Rage		
Fee Gt.. Fee Cod(.	Fte Description ....................	Initial	Cw.Bal.	Delinquent
CC	AR	Arrest fte -Old Cases (County)	21.N	21.N	2f.N
CC	AAAEBT	Gunty Arrrtt fits	f,)39.N	1,138.64	1,438.64
CC	BAT	BREAIN ALCQi4. TESTING (Countyl	4,121.N	3,584.95	3,515.41
CC	NF	Bail Gnd fee - 010 Gses lCowty)	121,N	121.N	121.N
CC	BOO	Bond fee	5,245N	4,818.54	4,8N.82
CC	CJY	Capias er Yarrant Fee ltowty)	3M.N	3N.N	3N.N '
a	CA	Gusty Attorney Fee	16,747.N	15,713.49	SS,W9.77
(x	CCA	CWR CD4T ilPDEI~ (Gunty)	41.N	41.M	41.M
CC	Cdp	l]>Il[T InSi APPEAL ORSE tCowty)	i.N	6.N	i.N
CC	C!6	CaAllatbE SECtRITY	1,395M	1,3n.M	1,299.27
CC	CJPC	CYieieail Justice Dlauinl	7,52SN	6,988.41	6,%1.N
CC	CLK	Clerk Fte	28,332.M	26,391.91	26,289.36
tS	COV1F1	Couiteent and Release Fee	5,3BI.N	4,944.33	4,926.52
CC	Cl	CpDlE1f16IVE AEIiRBIL1TAT10N tCowt	3,SIS.N	3,157.51	3,124.55
CC	t5	Crite Stoppers (State)	S,N2.N	923.27	919.64
lx	CVCA	CR1)E VICTIM'S COlP.	19,167.N	17i7N.i2	17,614.54
CC	DPS	Departeent of Public Safety tCowty	141.N	128.42	127.47
F	FINE	Fine (Road i 4ridge>	587,434.61	44(,349.32	414,729.47
F	flIE.1	Fine -Additional (Countyl	IM.N	SZ12	52.@
F	FINE.2	Fiae -Additional	2,6N.N	2,451.N	2,451.N
f	FINE.3	Fiet -Additional	SN.N	466.15	4b6.15
CC	BSLL	SILSfSDIE CU1(TY i41RRANT SERVSCE	35.N	35.N	35.N
CC	SR	STATE fiE"EAiI. II:VENIE	1,532.58	t, 438.12	1, 431.58
CC	7CDT	Judicial Court Dersonnel Training	7B9.N	bb1.28	659.49
CC	.Alit'	Jury Fte	la& N	116.84	116.84
CC	KARIEST	Genty ((rest fete (Guntyl	2,337.N	2,148.32	2,139.%
CC	KISD	Rerr Gully Sheriffs Offitt Arrest	23.N	23.N	23.48
CC	LEMI	BI.ACJ(!~ LAW ENFDRCEIEIIT MAIY1fiEl471	353.58	3-~. X11	328.93
CC	LED	Lar Enfarceaent Education	712.54	562.33	659.86
CC	tEO~	LAY E11•DRL~]ENf DFfICERS -CONT. ED.	328.N	311.17	389.28
iL	tFDE	L111 lfF1CERS EDUCATION V.T.C. A. 60V	4.N	3.11	3.11
lx	MCC	Nisd Ceert Cests -Old Gses Only	SS, 7655/	49,417.58	49,417.58
ix	ilF	t)peratr i lhaeff. Fwd ICowty)	975N	939.36	414.13
(>;	pNp	AFB IIIIiSE1ENT i PR6ERVATIQI	4, 6N. N	4, 312. SB	4,294.47
lx	SNFRIFf	Sheriff`s Fees as of 11-31-85 fGw	69.N	69.N	69.N
F	S14FEE	Special fee tGwty)	2M.N	2M.N	2N.N
CL a	TABC	Tteas AlnMlic Beverage Gnission	f1.N	11.N	11.N
tL	TP1O	ieeas Parks asd Nildlife Dept (Gw	241.N	241.N	241.N
CC	Tull	1Rll~ FEE	5,195 N	4,418.71	4,776.47
CC	VII®	Videe fee tGiwty)	3,147.N	1,17534	1,15'i.i1
CC	Y/Fff	Yitsess fee fSu6poesatl (Cewtyl	21.N	21.N	21.N
CC	1111.	Ysrrest fGanty)	4,944.N	4,458.32	4,448.43
tx	YILLIIIllOIiILlIll60i C0. kpARANT SERVICE	35M	35N	35N
tT	YlT	Snbpeena - Nitnessts) (Canty)	24.N	1569	1569
			132.11	N1,49561 ,	_ "Tlll:1 aai Delinquent
	Total delinquent fine and costs		St"7 ,
	Less pre-1991 delinquent fees			
	Total fine and costs delinquent since Jan. 1991	24T;3i~3.	
Exhibit "D"
__ ... .. _... ___ -_.. _... c'f.~ ..'~.c_ _.'~_._
a~"h°~". tine __ +W
Exhibit "E"
MONEY COLLECTED THROIIGH FINANCIAL HEARINGS
October ] 993 through December 1995 $ 63,206.28"
January 1996 up to the present time $ 10.284.43{
Total S 73,490.71
* Based on Karen Kuhlmann's figures
Exhibit "F"
MUNICIPAL SERVICES BUREAU COLLECTIONS
From October of 1995 through January 31, ]997
1995
October
November
December
1996
January
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
September
October
November
December
January
Total
Less 35°le collection fees
Fees retained by county
$ 151 00
1292.40
1025.08
1326.68
277.00
863.89
466.00
384 61
1134.50
430 00
559.00
305.00
459.00
429.50
280 00
292.00
$ 9673.66
-3386,48
$ 6289.18 `'~
Exhibit "G"
CRIMINAL STATISTICS REPORT
YEAR	CASES FILED
1991	1665
1992	1545
1993	1673
1994	1653
1995	1851
1996	1682
Totals:	10,069
CASES DISPOSED
1818
1915
1654
1555
1895
1877
1o,77a
Average number of cases filed per year (1991 through 1996)
Average number of cases filed per month (1991 through 1996)
Average number of cases disposed per year (1991 through 1996)
Average number of cases disposed per month (1991 through 1996)
%OF CASES DISPOSED
109%
124%
99%
94%
102%
112%
640%
1678
140
1785
149
Average % of cases filed to cases disposed 1991 through 1496 107°t°
Exhibit "H"
` CRIMINAL SECTION
		TKEET					
	D'W.I'	OR	DRVG			OTHER	TOTAL
CASES ON DOCKET	OR	WORTHLESS	ORENSES	ASSAULT	1RAEi1C	CRIMINAL	CASES
	D U LD.	CnECKS				CASES	
, C45ES PEIplO FYIST OF YdEM ,							
.S~aa ar RV' ow.r a1f Owd•'V wad				
120	
359	
296	
2145
w..w. ~K.w,+	660	622	88				
i nEYV 45[4 f1LED DURRq 4gMH 1							
i~oO~Y w uw. i,VeV Yr N mry lYv		
41	
4	
14	
22	
2B	
3
,,,,. e.., nr...e E. •vnl	27						
~ CASES .R.E.LrD EIgY EowER eouRrs ~				1	5	2	e
~ OTHER CASE4 REACNMO DOCKET							
~ nvmwR+-~~Y I~YMnr.llwM~WMrt						
1	
25
A°"""`°" E"'	14	6	2	2			_
~ u or,., c.+. P..eK"E D,sAa ,							
.Yaa.. troy afMa orN.wf nw wlw							
y.w rr.+.n Y.,wKVn Av+w tail							
5- TOLL CASES A/OOtltET ~							
~..<.r.>o..aw+..oyy,w~,.e.mol		7	94	117	]96	327	2716
s TOLL dsvOSnwns :,							
,.,w w....v aw,RU.+I		22	7	7	23	17	105
- ^~			
,. usSSn,EDSns+wo55»wf~-» D			
Ma.FwalE5A1,iEIEW~I`a. MM' 4~		
649 87 130	
367 310 2211;
rm.^.bdrunmRae>,rw+wn	672		
s. uwAPwREREROED 4aKf n			
.W~ yr•Oaary~AEAYIIM W) Wa MAY			
n~.wnA Vwsa,waawo/w.v..nm+.er			1236
v.w+oro+			
f ~+E OF USES ORROSED	
b0AY3OR LE	
SS 7, DAYS TO fD OAY! Ef DAYS TON DAYS	TOLL CASES
OVER f40AYi 15navp wpnpplumuw EeWwl
.rara.~sP O~+.awamv.+			
nUYSER OF CASES t.		4 LOS
	i t lA	
COUNTY 1-
January 1991 Monthly Report
Cases pending on docket 22I ~
Unapprehended cases	~I 3_~
Active cases nn docket	h75
Exhibit "I"
__ ___
r.err ~cun;!	
Lc~o[~ Lurt	
e. .. Moctn:y Feport	---
for M~-n n:,
	CRI	MINAL SECTI	ON
\ D	T D	A T	0 T \
\	H R	5 R	T 0 \
\ u	E U	5 R	N T \
---------------\	F G	A F	E' A \
\ I	T S	U F	R L \
C{IL5E5 Oh DOCKET \		L I	1
\		T C	\
1.	Gses pending
First of Month	I I
I 2251	1 1 I
64b1 731 961	I
1151	I
1651	1
li~tD I
:.	Gses Ftlyd	I I	I 1 i	I	I	I
	Durtng Month	I 141	181 181 71	61	71	W I
-	,-_----a-----+~	~-a------+--------+__	--a--	--a-	---I
3.	Gses Appealed	I I	I I I	I	I	I
	Fror lower Courts	I BI	BI 81 Bl	81	it	8 I
					
4.	Dther Gses	I 1	I I I	I	I	I
	Aeachinp pocket	I I	I I I	I	I	I
		•sszsvazzaee:ss==_-~1rs~.u:eeaw:::asasamsresaea^	-=r::~::1
a.	lotions to Rrvokr	I 1	I I I	I	1	1
		I 121	8I 31 41	11	BI	36 I
		a~____	_~--__-_____~-~---a__	_i_-_	_a___	_-_~ I
b.	All Qther Gses	I I	I I I	I	I	I
	RraMing Docket	I pl	pl BI pl	81	81	p I
		_.~_-___a---	--a-------+-_-_----+--	---+---	--a-	--- I
;,	total Gses	I 1	1 1 I	i	I	I
	on Docket	I 2511	6781 881 1871	1381	1801	1424 I
-	----- ~	-~---__~__~	--t----_-____~_______~a--	-~~---	-_r	~~l
b.	Total	I I	I I I	I	I	1
	Dispositions	I 371	551 181 281	241	161	188 I
-	-----~--	+-------1---------+--------a------a-----+----	--a--------- I
7.	CJf1;Ilnp.	I I	I I I	i	I	~
~
	Etpl~f'Rmaitli~	I 274(	6151 701 87:	1861	1641	-.~i~ii?fl
	
__.... ---	
-*_=--tea===_=__+___~ =~t=._-=..r-"	,..
-- r------+---==mss]
~~
3.	Ueapprehtgded	I !	I t I	I	I	I
	Cacos%" ""	t 1571	5811 421 551	391	1281	••-'°`!14
			
9.	Age of Gsrs	i 38 days or less	131 to EB days I bi to 9p days	I over 98 days ITata	l Gars 1
	Disposed	I 31	1 21 f 11	I 185	I	168 I
dy::,,.~, :i .wn .
:ege
lasifff{{ffHffaiffiffffHffifffiffifffHiffffffaatfafffi4ffffiifa
! This Report is a True and Rccurate Reflection of the Records f
a of the County Court at Law of Kerr County +
r f
- ire red b (.t?Lc~.,,/ ('n . the, i r o ~ s
w r
March 1997 Monthly Report + Date B4i11/9 ~~ f
ttte*+fafitiaataaf+aatitatfarf aiataffaaiiafaaaaaiaaftaiaaitataattt
Cases pending on docket 1256
Unapprehended cases - 914
.Active cases on docket 342
Exhibit "J"
`~'...w,
Kerr County
Warrant Officer•
County Court at Law
Budget Year 1997-99
Salary (17.1 pay grade)
FICA
Retire~ent
Group Ins
Bond
Travel
Telephone
Supplies
Total
Start-up
Desk
Chair
File
Terainal
Co~puter (If linked to SD)
20,217
1,547
1, 575
~, a~7
50
2r400
1,200
1.000
30,826;,
450
300
2S0
350
1,650
3,000.00;;
Exhibit "K"
('OM1141SSIONF,IiS' COLJR"I' AGENDA REQUEST
PLEASF FURNISH ONE ORICINAI AND FIVF COPIF,S OF THIS RF.OUF.ST AND DOCUMENTS
TO BE REVIE\VED BY THE COURT.
MADE BY: Judge Spencer W. Brown
MEETING DATE: 5/12/97
SUBJECT': (PLEASE BE SPECIFIC)
OFFICE: Couu_t_y nur a Taw
TIME PREFERRED: 10:00 A. M.
Warrant Officer for Countv Court at Law
EXECUTIVE SESSION REQUESTED: (PLEASF. STATE REASON)
` ESTIMATED LENGTH OF PRESENTATION:
IF PERSONNEL MATTER -NAME OF EMPLOYEE:
NAME OF PERSON ADDRESSING THE COURT: Spencer Brown
Time for submitting this request for Court to assure that the matter is posted in accordance with Title 5,
Chapter 551 and 552, Government Code, is as follows:
Meeting scheduled for Mondays:
5:00 P.M. previous Tuesday.
THIS REQUEST RECEIVED BY:
THIS REQUEST RECEIVED ON:
a
All Agenda Requests will be screened by the County Judge's Office to determine if adequate information has
been prepared for the Court's formal consideration and action at time of Court Meetings. Your cooperation will
be appreciated and contribute towards you request being addressed at the earliest opportunity. See Agenda
Request Rules Adopted by Commissioners' Court.
Item 2.7 Consider and discuss
request for a warrante officer
for the County Court at Law
May 12, 1997
Vol. V page 144