Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion

THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OIFTEXA~ Hon. Joe U. Lovelaae Opinion RO. v-844. County Attorney Cam County Re: The legality of possess- Linden, Texas ing not more than one quart of liquor In Texas without papent of Texas tax. Dear sir: Your letter and brief requesting an opfnlon Ia set out, In part, a8 follows: “In Deoeaber o? 1948 the defendant use legally arrested and was found to have in his porsersion one full pint and one partial pint of whiskey whlah bore no Texas atamp and no valid evldenoe was affixed thereto whloh ahow- ed that the stamp had been paid. The evidence showed that the whimkey was bought la Arkan- sas, in compllanoerlth their laws, and was brought into Texas for the personal use of the defendant. “Is there a conflict between &Male 666- 23a, Sea. 4 (P.C,) and Article 666-17, Sec. 12 P.C. on the one aide, and Artiale 666-17 t18) tP.C.) on the other side? “If there Is a oonfllct between the Stat- utes enumerated In the above paragraph, did Articles 666-17, Sea. 18, P.C., repeal, bg lb plloation, Article 666-23a, Sea. 4, P.C.? To arrive at a proper determinationof these questions It must always be remembered that the Texas Liquor Control Aat as a whole presents a broad plan for the regulation of liquor. ArtSale 666-17, paragraph (18), V.P .C*, Is quoted as follows: Bon. Joe W. Lovelaoe, page 2 (v-844) "It shall be,unlawfuYfor'any person to Import, or to transport Into thfs Sty&e from any plaoe outslde~theStsrte~any~llquer, In exoews of,one (1) quart, in containersto whioh have not been affixed proper staiktax : .;$m;gd,F&sana;nte;d P located wlthzn,'thestate boun&ar$es,un- ens the same shall be~oonslgned~t the hold- er of a Wholesaler'sPermit authorkag the sale of such liquor and at his plaoe of busi- ness.* Article 666-23a, paragraph 4, V.P.C. provides: "It Is provided that any person may bring Into this State not more than one quart the required State tax atamps." It is apparent that the above quoted sect$ona of the Texas Liquor Control Act apply to different faot situations. Paragraph (18) of Artlole 666-17 applies to a pereon importing or transportinginto this State any Uzuo$ in excess of one quart, while paragraph 4, Artl- -23a, applies to any person bringing into this State not more than one quart of liquor for his own per- mmal use. Therefore, the two seotionn are not in con- ill t Sinae there Is no confllot, Article 666-17 (18) doe; iot repeal paragraph 4, Art&e 666~23a. In Role8 v. State, 132 S.W.2d 881, (Tex. Crln. 1939) the Court aft1 d the judgment of the trial court by which Roles was ozicted for having possession of Wh;h:t; in a pint container to which no stamp tax was This case specificallydistinguishesthe hold- ing In iorton v. State, 105 S.W.2d 669, (Tex. Crla. 1937) which stood for the pro$obitlonthat a person could bring a tax-exempt quart or less Into the State. In the Roles decision, Judge Rawklas said: *It appears that appellant was trans- porting the liquor from Louisiana Into Texas. Our State's attorney ealla attention to Hor- ton v. State, 132 Tex. Cr. R. 488, 105 S.W. 2d 669, suggestingthat our holding there might be regarded as against eustalnlng the Hon. Joe Ii.Lovelaae, page 3 (v-844) oonvlctlonhere unless a change In the stat- ute be mentioned. The holding in Horton's case was based on a provlslon In Seotion 4 of Ar;;rgt* V$q~;~s 2?:xi6FjC. (Ads 44th Leg- . The provlslon was omItted fr&'~ald Section 4 under the Aots of the 45th Legislature. . . . Attention la called to the ohange In the 'Texas Liquor Control Aat’ so any apparent oonfllet with the holding here and in Horton*8 case, supra, may be dispelled." The facts in the Boles case are slmllar to the fat&B set out In your requexnaacly, that the defend-t possessed one pint of liquor for hls personal use aad without the payment of tax. Therefore, under this au- thority, while a person may bring into this State not more than one quart of liquor for his own personal use, if sueh person falls to pay the requlred tax, he has vl- olated the Texas Liquor Control Aot; to tit, possesslng lllloit beverage. There Is no conflict between Artiole 666-17 (18) V.P.C. and Artlole 666-238 (4) V.P.C. inasmuch as Article 666-17 (18) ap- plies only when the amount of liquor im- ported into this State Is In excess of one quart and Article 666~23a (4) applies only where the amount Is one quart or less and Is being used for personal use. A person who brings into this State one qu& of liquor or less for his own personal use, and does not pay the required tax, violates the Texas Liquor Control Act, to wit: possessing il- licit beverage. Roles v. State, 132 S.Y.2d 881 (Tex. Crlm. 1939). Yours very truly, ATTORIVRY QRHRRAL OF TEXAS ATl’ORItRY QRNERAL John Reeves JR:lg:bh AfiiBistanf