NEY GENE
EXAS
Hon. Joe Resweber Opinion No. C-649
County Attorney
Harris County Re: Disposition of unclaimed or
Houston, Texas abandoned personal property
under Article 18.30, Code
Dear Mr. Resweber: of Criminal Procedure.
Zn your opInIon request you submItted the following
questions:
I,
1. Under Section 18.30, Vernon's Texas
Code of Criminal Procedure, effective
January 1, 1966, must a peace officer
turn over all unclaimed or abandoned
personal property which was In his
poseession before January 1, 1966, to
the County Purdhaslng Agent for dispo-
sition?
“2. Under such provision of the new code,
are automobiles Including those taken
into possession by a city pursuant to
its parking regulations to be turned
over to the County Purchasing Agent
and must the County pay to such City
fees assessed by It for the towing
and storage of such automobiles?"
The applicable part of Article 18.30 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure, 1966, provides:
"Sec. 1. All unclaimed or abandoned
personal property except whiskey, wine and
beer, of every kind, seized by a peace officer,
which is not held as evidence to be used in
any pending case and haa not been ordered
destroyed or returned to the person entitled
to possession of the same by a magistrate,
which shall remain unclaimed for a period of
30 days shall be delivered to the purchasing
agent of the county for sale. If the county,
has no purchasing agent then such property
shall be sold by the she~riff of the county."
-3147-
- .
Ron. Joe Resweber, page 2 (C-649,)
Sections 2, 3 and 4 of this article regulate the disposition
of any property delivered In accordance with Section 1.
The proper Interpretation and construction of Article
18.30 was considered In our opinion No. C-585, dated Jam%slry
18, 1966. There, we held, as digested In the summary of the
opinion:
‘The appllcablllty of Article 18.30
of the new Code of Criminal procedure Is
not limited to unclaimed or abandoned
personal property seized under a search
warrant; on the contrary, this Article
controls the disposition of all such pro-
perty (except intoxicants) In the custody
of peace officers where there is no special
statute providing for the disposition of
particular ltems’and kinds of property.”
Your first questIon,‘whether Art$cle 18.30 Is appli-
cable to property seized before January 1, 1966, but still
In the custody of peace officers on that date, Is answered
by Article 1.02 of the new Code; this article provides:
Article 1.02 Effective date
“This Code shall take effect and be
in. force on and after January 1, 1966. The
procedure presoribed shall govern all cri-
minal proce~edings pending upon the effective
date hereof Insofar as are applicable.”
By virtue of Article 1.02, we hold that all unclaimed
and abandoned property in the possession of a peace officer
as of January 1, 1966, must be disposed of In conformity with
the provisions of ArtIcle.18.30 unless the property be intoxl-
cants or unless the property Is of a particular kind covered
by a special disposition statute. It should also be observed
that Article 18.30 la a crlmlnal procedural statute and would
cover only suah property as Is seized In the course of criminal
Investigations or proceedings or when possession was obtained
by apeace officer through some activity related to the enforce-
ment of the,penal code of this State.
With regard to your second question, concerning the
application of Article 18.30’ to’ automobiles -Impounded by’ a
city Pursuant to its parkingregulatlons, notice Is taken that
automobiles are removed from the streets of a municipality
pursuant to ordinance regulation of parking on the streets.
-3148-
Hon. Joe Resweber, page 3 (C-649)
This seizure and removal from the streets may be authorized
under a city code to prevent obstruction of traffic on the
streets and is only Incidentally connected, If at all, to the
enforcement of the orImina1 statutes of Texas or the penal
ordinances of cities.
Inasmuch as the new Code of Criminal Procedure regu-
lates criminal proceedings (Article 1.02), Article 18.30 of
the Code has no application to automobiles Impounded by a
munlclpalI.ty under the authority of Its parking ordinances
for the purpoae of removing obstructions to traffic on the
city streets.
Since we are holding that Article 18.30 Is not appll-
cable to automobiles seized by a city and would not control
their eventual disposition, there Is no occasion to consider
the question of re-embursement or payment to a city by Harris
County for fees and expenses incurred by a city In the towing
and storage of these vehicles.
SUMMARY
All unclaimed and abandoned personal
property in the possession of peace offi-
eers on January 1, 1966, previously seized
In the course of law enforcement activities,
should be disposed of In accordance with
Article 18.30 of the Code of Criminal Pro-
cedure, unless the propertv is of a parti-
cular kind covered by a special disposition
statute.
Article 18.30 does not control the dis-
position of automobiles seized and removed
by a city from Its streets In order to pre- ':
vent the obstruction of traffic.
Very truly yours,
WAWCNERCARR
Attorney Qeneral of Texas
LFZ:cm
-3149-
Ron. Joe Resweber, page 4 (C-649)
APPROVED:
OPINION COMMITTBE
W. V. Geppert, Chairman
Sam Kelley
Ronald Luna
John Reeves
Howard Fender
APPROVED FOR THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
BY: T. B. WRIGHT
-3150-