Does a Texas police department have to fingerprint you for free if you ask?

Plain-English summary

A state representative who chaired the House Public Safety Committee told the Attorney General that some Texas law enforcement agencies were either refusing to fingerprint people who asked, or charging a fee to do it. The agencies were apparently reading section 80.001 of the Human Resources Code to mean that free fingerprinting was only for children. The representative asked three questions: could a local agency refuse the service, could it charge for it, and could it attach extra conditions?

The Attorney General said the statute's plain language answered all three, and the answer to each was no. Section 80.001(a) says a state agency or the agency of any political subdivision "shall comply" with a person's request to have his fingerprints, or those of his child or ward, recorded. "Shall" is a command, not a suggestion, so an agency cannot refuse. Section 80.001(b) says the agency "may not charge for the service," and nothing in that subsection limits the free service to children. Reading it that way would make the statute's own words ("to have a record of his fingerprints made") pointless surplusage, which courts do not do. And nothing in the statute lets an agency bolt on extra conditions. The law put a duty on state and local agencies that they have to carry out without fee or restriction, beyond the practical limit of offering it during normal business hours when staff is available.

The short version: if you walked into a Texas police department or sheriff's office and asked to be fingerprinted, the agency had to do it, for anyone and not just children, and it could not charge you.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1995. 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.

Section 80.001 of the Human Resources Code has been amended since 1995, and the free-fingerprinting duty has been narrowed in later versions of the law. Read this page for how the office read the statute as it stood in 1995, and check the current text of section 80.001 before assuming a Texas agency must fingerprint you for free today.

What the opinion meant for those who asked

For law enforcement agencies: The opinion concluded that an agency had a mandatory duty under section 80.001 to fingerprint anyone who requested it, could not refuse, could not charge, and could not impose conditions beyond offering the service during normal business hours when staff was available.

For members of the public who needed fingerprints: The opinion read the statute to give any requester (not only a parent fingerprinting a child) the right to free fingerprinting from a state or local agency on request.

For the legislator who raised the issue: The opinion rejected the interpretation that some agencies had adopted, that the free service was meant only for children, finding no support for it in the text.

Common questions

Could a Texas police department refuse to fingerprint someone who asked?
No. The Attorney General read section 80.001(a)'s "shall comply" as a mandatory command, so the agency had to perform the service.

Could the agency charge a fee?
No. Section 80.001(b) said an agency "may not charge for the service," and the office found nothing limiting the free service to children.

Was the free service only for fingerprinting children?
No. The office concluded that reading the statute to cover only children would treat part of its own language as meaningless surplusage, which is not how statutes are construed.

Could an agency add its own conditions, like requiring an appointment or a reason?
No, beyond the practical point that the service could be offered during normal business hours when staff was available. The opinion said the duty had to be discharged without fee or restriction.

Background and statutory framework

Section 80.001 of the Human Resources Code, as it stood in 1995, had two subsections. Subsection (a) required a state law enforcement agency, or the law enforcement agency of any political subdivision, to comply with a person's request to record that person's fingerprints or the fingerprints of the person's child or ward. Subsection (b) barred the agency from charging for the service and barred it from retaining the fingerprint records unless the requester specifically asked it to.

The office resolved the questions on the statute's plain terms. It treated "shall comply" in subsection (a) as mandatory, citing the standard dictionary understanding that "shall," as used in statutes, is a word of command denoting obligation (Black's Law Dictionary 1375 (6th ed. 1990)). On the fee question, it read subsection (b)'s flat prohibition on charging as applying to all requesters, not only to those fingerprinting children, because the narrower reading would render the subsection (a) language about a person having "a record of his fingerprints made" surplusage, and Texas courts do not treat statutory language as surplusage (Chevron Corp. v. Redmon, 745 S.W.2d 314, 316 (Tex. 1987)). Finding nothing in the statute authorizing additional conditions, the office concluded the duty had to be discharged without fee or restriction.

Citations

Statutory provisions discussed:

• Human Resources Code § 80.001(a) (state and local agencies "shall comply" with a fingerprinting request)
• Human Resources Code § 80.001(b) (no charge for the service; no retention of records unless requested)

Case discussed:

• Chevron Corp. v. Redmon, 745 S.W.2d 314, 316 (Tex. 1987) (statutory language not to be treated as surplusage)

Secondary authority discussed:

• Black's Law Dictionary 1375 (6th ed. 1990) (meaning of "shall")

Source

• Landing page: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/opinions/dan-morales/dm-0315
• Original PDF: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1995/dm0315.pdf

Original opinion text

Best-effort transcription from a scanned PDF. Minor errors may remain — the linked PDF is authoritative.

Office of the Attorney General
State of Texas

DAN MORALES
ATTORNEY GENERAL

January 13, 1995

Honorable W. Keith Oakley
Chair
Committee on Public Safety
Texas House of Representatives
P.O. Box 2910
Austin, Texas 78768-2910

Opinion No. DM-315

Re: Interpretation of section 80.001 of the Human Resources Code, which concerns the duty of local law enforcement officials to perform fingerprinting services (RQ-718)

Dear Representative Oakley:

You ask this office to interpret section 80.001 of the Human Resources Code, which concerns the duty of local law enforcement officials to perform fingerprinting services.

Section 80.001 reads:

(a) A state law enforcement agency or the law enforcement agency of any political subdivision of the state shall comply with the request of a person to have a record of his fingerprints made or a record of the fingerprints of a child or ward of the person made.

(b) A law enforcement agency may not charge for the service provided under this section and may not retain records of fingerprints made under this section unless specifically requested to do so by the person requesting the service.

You note that some Texas law enforcement agencies are either refusing to provide such service or charging a fee for it, apparently taking the view that, as you put it, "the statute did not intend for local law enforcement officers to do free fingerprinting for anyone except children."

Accordingly, you ask three questions: first, whether a local law enforcement agency may refuse to provide fingerprinting services on request; second, whether it may charge for such services; and third, whether it may impose conditions (other than providing the service during normal business hours when staff is available) on providing such services.

We believe that the plain language of the statute addresses your concerns. As to your first question, a local law enforcement agency is required to perform the service, and may not refuse to do so. Section 80.001(a) provides that the agency "shall comply" with a request for this service. The language used by the legislature is mandatory, not precatory. Black's Law Dictionary 1375 (6th ed. 1990) ("As used in statutes, contracts, or the like, this word is generally imperative or mandatory[;] [i]n common or ordinary signification, the term 'shall' is a word of command, and one which has always or which must be given a compulsory meaning as denoting obligation").

Similarly, the language of section 80.001(b) plainly answers your second question. An agency "may not charge for the service provided under this section." Nothing in the provision suggests that this service is to be provided free of charge only to children. Such a reading would treat the phrase "to have a record of his fingerprints made" as surplusage. See Chevron Corp. v. Redmon, 745 S.W.2d 314, 316 (Tex. 1987) (statutory language not to be treated as surplusage).

Nor does anything in the statute permit a local law enforcement agency to impose additional conditions on the performance of this service. The law imposes a duty on local law enforcement agencies which they must discharge without fee or restriction.

SUMMARY

Section 80.001 of the Human Resources Code obliges state and local law enforcement agencies to provide free fingerprinting services to the public upon request and without additional conditions.

DAN MORALES
Attorney General of Texas

JORGE VEGA
First Assistant Attorney General

SARAH J. SHIRLEY
Chair, Opinion Committee

Prepared by James Tourtelott
Assistant Attorney General