this case “because the grand jury refused to indict.” Therefore, he argues, allowing the AG to prosecute this case in any county “circumvents, overrides, and usurps the power” of Dallas County District Attorney over this case, unduly interfering with the judicial branch while overburdening the Rockwall County District Attorney with responsibility for a case it should not have. The Texas Constitution vests the AG with authority to “perform other duties as may be required by law.” Tex. Const. art. IV, § 22. This broadly worded express provision gives the legislature the right to impose “other duties” on the AG and provides the specific exception required to allow the legislature to alter the constitutional duties of the county and district attorneys. See Meshell, 739 S.W.2d at 254-55 (<HOLDING>); Saldano, 70 S.W.3d at 880 (“[The Texas
recognizing legislature cannot remove or abridge district attorneys exclusive prosecutorial function unless authorized by an express constitutional provision holding that corps decision not to remove submerged unmarked piling was within discretionary function exception holding that private individual could not bring a claim to remove a judges name from the roll of attorneys holding that ccmcs activities did not amount to a traditional exclusive public function recognizing a discretionary function exception to that waiver