Attorney General Opinions 
Relating to County Government

2012 Courts

• This opinion discusses the roles of general sessions judges, sheriffs, and county court security committees in developing and implementing rules governing courtroom security in the county courthouse.  The legislature has placed the responsibility for developing security measures at a county courthouse with the county court security committee, with any standards requiring funding to be approved by the county legislative body, and a judge may not find the sheriff or his staff guilty of contempt solely for following the rules duly adopted by the county court security committee.  Opinion No. 12-107 (November 26, 2012).

• A general sessions judge may alter the original bail amount or bail conditions at any time prior to or at the time defendant is bound over to the grand jury, but a judicial commissioner does not have the authority to alter bail after a defendant has already been admitted to bail.  Opinion No. 12-82 (August 23, 2012)

• If a criminal defendant is ordered to pay fines on an installment plan under T.C.A. ' 40-24-101, the court clerk receiving the payment is required to allocate the money first to litigation taxes, then to costs, and last to fines, as required by T.C.A. 40-24-105.  Because this statute expressly sets out the manner in which partial payments are to be allocated, trial courts cannot alter the allocation by order.  Opinion No. 12-52 (May 10, 2012)

• The county is required under T.C.A. ' 16-2-505 to establish a security committee for the purpose of determining the security needs of its courtrooms.  Opinion No. 12-32 (March 9, 2012).