Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion

,... . - - THE ATTOERNEW GENERAL OF%%CXAS HonorableTed Butler OpinionNO. M- 702 CriminalDiatriotAttorney San Antonio,Texas 78204 Re: Whether oertalntiilltm personnelare qualified to serve as jurors. Dear Hr. Butler: Your recent letter to thie offioe requestaour opinion a8 to the qualiflcatlone of milltary’pereonnel to serve as jurors. The Texas ConstitiM.on,ArticleXVI, Sectlon.19,relating to the qualificationsof Jurors, providesthat ?uoh qualifl- eationsshall be preaorlbedby the Legislature. Artiole2133, Vernon’sCivil Statutes,as last amendedin 1969, reads, In part, a0 followe: “All personaboth male and female over twenty-one (21) years of age are oompetentjurors,unleee dis- qualifiedunder some provisionof thie chapter. No person shall be qualifiedto serve a8 a jurop who doea not poeiess the followingqualiflcatlons: 1. He mu& be a oltlzenbf the etate and of the oounty,,Snwhich he Is to serve,and qualified,under the Constitutionand lane to vote in said county; provided,that hla failureto registerto vote a8 requiredby law ehall not be held to diequalifyhim for jury eeyice In any instance. . . . It shouldbe noted that the 1969 amendmentof Artiole 2133, aupra, deletedthe requirementthat a prospective juror be a freeholderin the State of Texas or a houeeholder In the County. Artiole 35.12,Vernon86Code of CriminalProcedure,as laat amendedin 1969, ,aontaine the followingteet of quallfl- cationsof a prorpeotivejuror: “3. Exoept for paymentof poll tax or regletratlon, are you a qualifiedvoter In this county and state under the Constitutionand lawa of thle state?” -3395- HonorableTed Butler,page 2 (M-702) The 1969 amendment also deletedfrom this Artlolethe teet relatingto the prospeativejuror’8 statusas a freeholder In the State or a householderIn the County. A "qualifiedvoter" or "quallfledelector"as definedIn the Texas EleotlonCode, Article1.018, %eanz a person who meet8 all qualiflcatlon8and requirement8for votinga8 pre- scrib&dIn (Article5.02) of this oode." The Texas Election Code, Article 5.02,Vernon*8Civil Statutes,sets out these qualifications and requirement8as follows: “Every pereon subjectto none of the foregoing dl8quallflcatlone who 8hall have attainedthe age of twenty-oneyear8 and who shall be a oltlzenof the United State8 and who shallhave residedIn this state one year next preoedlngan electionand the .laat~six month8 within the districtor county In which suob,personoffers to vote, and.whoahall have registereda8 a voter, shall be deemed a qualified elector;" Article5.02, aupra,was enactedpursuantto the Texas Constitution, Artlale6, Se&Ion 2, and from 1963 until 1965 providedthat membersof the Armed Force8 stationedin Texas were to vote only In the oountyof their residenceat the time of their entry Into the service. This requirement had long been part of the aforementioned Constitutional provision. The effeot of auoh a provisionwas that a servlcemanwho moved his home to Texas, while In the aervlce, could be preventedfrom ever voting in Texas 80 long as he remainedIn the aervloe. AttorneyGeneral'sOpinion No. C-173 (1963). This requirementof the Texas Constitutionwas declared to be In violationof rights secured by the,XqualProteotion Clause or the FourteenthAmendmentof the United State8 ConstitutionIn the oa8e or Carringtonv. Rash,a85sSiC;t. ; g* .Sd.2d675 9691 d z v. Davis 2$ P.&p; %?1964 , afkrmed ' ' us 255 13 L.Ed.2dala I 1965 ‘7 These cases promptedthe &d&t of Texas Constltutlo~, Article6, Seatlon2, supra, ln 1966 and a consequentohange in the Texas ElectionCode, Artlole 5.02, aupra, that 8amc Year, making it clear that a eervlo&aiwho~lniendedto move his home to Texas, and did, could-qualifyto vote. After this seriesof events,Artlole 5.W, Vernon'sCivil Statutes,was amendedin 1967 to provide,in part, a8 follows: -3396- . . HonorableTed Butler,page 3 ' (M-762) "(j) No person tn the nili&aryaervloeof the United States shall acquirba residenaeih this state while he is livltigonea milit@Py post in quarters whlah he Is requiredto,ocaupy. A peeson ln mllltary servicewho is permittedto choosehis place of abode shallngt be consideredto have acquireda residence merely In cogeequenceof hi8 preeenae&t the plaoe where he l$vti'e while performinghis n+lltaryduties; and such person shall not be~conelderedto &we acquired a residenceunless he Intend8to reaialn the* ind tb make that plaoe his home indefinitely, both during the remainderof hls militaryeervlqe~whenever~ military duties db not requlre,hisprese,nce elsewhere,and afte~.~hie.mlli~ary'~etivlce 18 tbrminated.". This Offgce held in Attorney"QenetiaiL'8 OpinionHO., W-1322,($962) that."any~memb@r of ,theArmed~Force.8 who legallycldima a homesteadexemptibnfrom Tetis ad'valorem taxes 18 a lcitl!&en~,,of this State for all purpoBeBof ad,' valoremtqes . . . That Opinionstatesthat whetheror not a'se~illceman~eho16eIs legallyestablished,inTexas $8 a queetin to.be determinedfrom all~reievantfiats. It was Suitherheld In Attorney&nertillaOpinion No. C-712 (1966): II3. There Is a rebuttablepresumptionthat euch a person In the military serviceretained his doplloll,ln the State from which .hewas lnducted,untll such time as he i'eshown by olear and unequivocalproof.to have effective1 b d d It d t blishdd a domicll e~lBe*here i' a(~p~~ls adgd)? a That Opinionfizthersays 'Itliit ~nohartiind 'fastrule can be formulatedwith respedt.tothe servlaeq's domlcil or residenceetatus. Each case muet be 'dealdedupon ttya peoullarfaOtB~preBented with referenceto objective,evidence to eupportthe servlcemsn~aIntention." In fact, the ordinaryrules of domiclloreate a presumptionthat the p&ace where a person aotually.llvea Is his danioil,althou@ it Is clear that SomethIngbeyondmere residence.%aneeded., ~' thl.~~J". 2d.65,Domlcll,Section5, and cases olted . Artlole5.08(j),supra, attempt8In It8 flret sentence to make it Impossiblefor a servicemanunder those olroupa- -3397- - HonorableTed Butler;page 4 (M-702) t0 acquirea residencein Texas no matter What he StaINeFI may Intend to do and no matter what he does to evidence that73%iitlon! Such a provision16 unreaBonableand dlacrlmlnatory.It wa8 stated In CarrlngtOnv. Rash, supra,at page 96: "By forbiddinga soldierever to oontrovtirt the preawnptlbnof non-reeldenoethe Texas Constitution in ViO18tiOnOf iaDpOSe8 an lnVidiOU8dlacri.mination the FourteenthAmendment." It la, therefore,the opinionof 'thisOffice that the Texas EleatlonCode, Article 5.08(j),Vernon'sCivil Statutes,inaoraras it prevent8a servicemanfrom ever establl8hlnga residenceIn Texas, Is 8,nunaonstltutiona1 deprivationOf equal protectionof the laws to those servicemen. The remainder of Article 5,08(j), Bupra, eStab1iSheSpre8WnptlOnSagainsta serviceman aOqUiring a resldenoeln Texas. The quallfloatlona for votinftas set out In Article 5.02, supra,includethat of being one who shall be a oitlzenof the United States and who shall have resided in this state one year next precedingan electlonand the last elx month8 within the districtor county In which SUCh person offers to vote." A "citizen"is one who, a8 a member 0r a nation or of the body politicof the sovereignstate, owes allegianceto and may claim reciprooalprotectionfrom Its government: Ozbolt v. LwnbermensIndemnityExchange,204 S.W. 252 (Tex. clv.A~p.1W3 , no wrltj citi hi I a statusor condition,and le the rtkult o?%h'aot and intent.Residence, with respeotto the quallfloatlona of jurors,~ls chieflya questionof Intent. Vaughn v. State, 134 Tex.Cr3.m.97, 113 s.w.2d895 (1938);Hutson V. State two oases, 106 Tex.Cr3.m.278, 291 S.W. go3 rm, &h oitlzenehipand residence,therefore,are keyed to'theestablishmentof the necessary'intent. The eBtab1iBhmentin Article 5,08(j),supra,or rebuttablestatutorypree\nnptions againsta serviceman acquiringa resldenoeIn TeXa8 muat be viewed In light Of what la requiredof ordinaryoltlzenaIn this regard. To discriminateagainst servicemenIn order to avoid admlniatratlve dlfficultleaIn jury selectionwould not aatl8fythe requirements of CarrlngtOnv. Rash, supra,where it was Bald at page 91: -3398- . - - HonorableTed Butler,page 5 (M-702) "In other words, the privilegeto vote In a state Is wlthln the jurisdictionof the state Itself,to be exercisedas the state may direct,and upon suah terns as to It may seem proper,~provlded,of oourse,no discrimination Is made between lndivlduala,in vf6&atlon of the Federal Constitution."(Empha~l~added). Consequently, militarypersonnelcan gmiry to serve as proapeotlvejurorsunder Article2133, Vernon'sCivil Statutes,after 8atlafyingthe other requirementsof the Texas ElectionCode. Drovldedtheir Intent to establisha reBldenCein TeXaS~ia*boIIa fide. Peacockv.Bradshaw, 145 Tex. 68, 194 S.W.2d 551, 555 (m-1 8 V. ,&I' tlett, 377 S.W.2d 636, 637 (Tex.Sup.1964);&&t?a v:Pena, 4Ob S.W.2d 769, 776 (Tex.Clv.App. 1966, no writ). SUMMARY MilitarypersonnelCM qualifyto serve as prospeotivejurorsunder Artlole 2133, Vernon's Clvll~Statutes,after satisfyingthe other re- quirementsof the Texas ElectionCode, provided their Intentto establisha residenceIn Texas is bona fide. Article 5.08(j),Vernon'sCivil Statutes,insofaras it prevent8a aervlceman from ever establishinga residenceIn Texas, or insofaras It discriminates against servicemen In the estab&lshlngof a r6sidencein Texas, la an unconstitutionalvlolatlonof the Equal Pro- tectionof the Laws provisionof the Fourteenth Amendmentto the United StatesConstltutlon. Preparedby James Ii.Quick A88latantAttorneyGeneral -3399- Honorable Ted Butler, page 6 (M-702) APPROVED: OPZNIONCO~I!ll%E Kerns Taylor, Chairman W; E. Allen, Co-Chairman Wayne Rodgers Ralph Rash J. C. Davis Vlnce Taylor MEAD73F. QRIFFIN staff Legal A88istant ALFRED WALKER Executive ASeiBtWIt NOLA WHITE Firat Assistant -3400-