Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion

OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS AUSTIN lmloPrBle Hoper fhm¶.lQll,Jr., Mnotor l3.30~~~ of Fublia aSiety Auntla, Texea Dear SIC1 Attention1 the adBllni8tntlan Ci*ll Statutes af ‘)el ** "Aho, phme dsiincr In tour opiniea iihe terr fomwt of o-tent, ju r ir d h tla a * a* it jurirdhtlaa* fnta r ia edSeation 1 64 , ldvir ing U8 Of the eottrt tht8 tern saartitutet.* 133 Xonorabla E0m.p thU'cC18OI1, Jr., Pqe 2 8OCtiOll816, 9-C, 16-A and 17 at the Texae Driver’8 LiCOtl8Ctd%V read as fO11OW8; "880. 16, (a) The 1iCtXl8COS my person 8hRll be automstlaally8UrpQndedor revoked upon final oonQictlon of allyof the fallowin& Off8il8*8t "(1) llegli.gmtholteid8 rerult%ng from the operetlon OS a motor vehlole. "(2) Driv¶ng a motor Qehlols while under the lnfluenoe of Intox1eatsng1IQuor or MFo0ts.c drugn. “(3) Any offense iable Lz8a felony III%- der the motor vehicle p”” av8 of this Btata. "(4) Upon three oonvlctioa8of violstIng any of the provision6 of Article 801 of the p0d cad0 Of %bX@II,OF 8OOtiOXilo Of chaptOP 42 of %ho Venezm$Lava ai the Seoond Called Zte$t8ltLtUPO 8OUfOll Of th0 ]rOX'ty-fiF8t Oi POX- aIn uomltted vlthIn a period of twelve (12) aon8eeutlQemonths. "(5) A aonvlotlcn of'a driverof a motor Qehiole Involved In an aocldent or aollI8loa, upon a ahargo of tallure to mtop, render aid, Uld diselow ht.81dOntity St the 8OOIH Of 8aid aaoldet or collI8lon. "(6) Convletionupon two separate cbrrge8 of aggravatdd aaaault upon a person by moan8 of motor veh%ole, ae provided by lmr. “(b) The POvOCatiOn OF 8USp8llSiOn above provided the fiwt inrtanoebe for a 8hall 3.x1 period of six (6) months. In event any lloenee 8hdll be revoked or 8U8pOnded under th8 ?roQl- 8iCn Of thl8 8OctiOII fQP a 8eocmd the, raid 8eoond revoo~tlonor 8u8pen8lon mhall be for a period of one a&llt1oM1 year. '(a) The revocation or 8uapen8ioz1 of any lioense 8bal.lbe autometioally extended upon liaearee being convleted of opemtlng a mtor vehialb vhile the lIaen8e of 8uoh pewon 18 134 Bonorable Eomer ffarrl8on,Jr., Page 3 8U8pended or revoked; woh lxtonded period Of POVOO~tiOliOF 8U8pOMiOn to be fbl'a like period am the orlglnal revoaatlonor 8u8p8n8iatL *+a l* “sec . 9 -o .The Departmnt 18 mlthorl8ed to !%Uepend.Orrevoke the llcen8e o? my reeldent of this State upon meeivimg notioe of the aon- QiOtiOn Of 8Uoh JMP8olifJlUlOther 8tEtO Of (UI offense therein vhlch, lf ooarrlttedLo thl.8 State, would be gPoUI3dsiOP 9U8p8n8iOn or re- voeatlon of the 11~3en88of en operator or chauffeur. %o . 16-A. (a) Before 8U8~Oding the liaeuus of any person a8 in thi8 6ootlon authorlied,the Depertment ahall provide for a hearing and im- mediately notliJ th8 1laenue in rrltlng and ehall afford him an opportunityto &tend the hearing a8 early (LOpraotLosil, 8UOh he8rLmg to be aet within not to exceed tventp (20) baya, vhioh 8hnll be in a aourt of oompetent jurl8diotion,after reomlpt of 8uoh notloer by the llaen8ee. Suah hearln& 8hnll M held in the aount~ wherein tha lloeruee P88idON u&M8 the Departmentand ths 1iWXl8- agree that luoh hearing 1887be held in 8088 Other 00unty. Upon mob h,ariag the ~pa~tmeat~8 duly authorlced agent may admini8teroath8 end nay i88UO 8ubpoeM.s fOP the ette3ldUlOe of Qftlle8888 and the production af relemt book8 urd pm-I.8 and may require a re-examlnatlonoi ths licen8w. Upon ruoh hearing the Department 8hall either l’erof.fAd it8 Order Of 8U8~Xl81Oll OF, @Ba?l t3BU60 appearing theref'op, amy extentlthissucrpension of 8U6h lioense or revoke auah llaen8e. "(b) Vpon such hearing the evldenoe h@ving been heard and tim reaords htwtn$ been exambod, the ~J7f&Ptl8OXlt 18 PUthOPit@d t0 8USp4JIi& bl’ revoke tie lleanre of 4a opozator or chauffeur upon d&ezaLztlxqthrt the llcenrse1 135 Honorable Homer QBrrI8on, Jr., Page 4 "1. &is 008wttea an offense for whioh nrsndatoryrevooationof lioen8e 18 regu%md upon conQictlon; “2. ha been Fs8pOn8iblOa8 a driQOP for eny accident resulting in the death or El injury o? tnotbar or 8eriou8 poperty “3. Is an habituallyreokle8lsor negligent driver ot n motor vehlolet “4. 18 lbll hebftW&i QiOittOP Of the tMfrl0 law; *5. 18 Incompetentto brlve a motor Qehlole; “6. Hta permitted an unlmrful or fraudulent use at ruoh lioenres or “7. %8 oamitted an o??en8@ ia another State, which if oomaitted in thl8 Sate vould be gPOund8 fOP 6U8peMiOn or POQOOttiOIh. %QC. 17, Any person denied a lloerue or vhome lloenae ha8 been oanoelled, 8tm&wnded,or revoked by the Departmentomept rhsm ewk oan- oelletloa or revoostlon 18 mndatom uader the provl5loi.mOS thla Aot shall have the Fight to file 8 petition within thlrtr (30) dnycl there- after for t hetring in the m8tter in the Qounty Oourt at Lav in the aountr vhereln aueh per8on 8hdll reside, or if #em b0 a0 COW&y COUrt at Ltw therein, then in the County Court of said oounty, aad 8UuCrh Gourt 18 he-by Qeated With jUFi8diOtiOII, Urd It 8ha11 be it8 duty to 88t the stter for hearing upon ten (10) da78 writ- ten nottoe to the Department,and themugan to t8ke teatimcmy and exi&.ne %ntO the faOt8 O? the OILI)@, end to deter&no vhether the peti- tioner is entitled to a lloen8e 0~ 18 8ubject to euspen8lon,i2anoeldation, or zwwoaation of llcumns under the provl8ions of'this Act. Bata injured party 8han hRQ@ the right to have hi8 oane heard in the County Courtl(elthW in term time OP vaoation of 8aid Court. 136 Honoreblw Hoawr Oerrleon, Jr., Page 5 It will be noted thet Section 16 provltl4sfor the emndatory auapwnel,on or revocation cf a drlver'e lIaense, vlth- out hearing, whenever the driver hem bwwn finally convlatwd of any of the offenses named therein; and the offenwe involved In your first quwstlon are eubstentlallyaoverwd by numbered p-ag=N~ (11, (2) amf (5). The question orlees whether the vorde "fine1 aonvlctlon'ln the first sentence of Section 16 have mferwnce to convictionsonlo obtained through oourte of this State. Should such limltatlonbe given the lenguege em- ployed, or should Section 16 be aonetruod eo aa to lnalude a fInel aonvlctlon In thw aourte of other jurledlatlone? VW do not believe the Legislature aontmnplatedor Intended euah aonstmctlon for the roaeon thet In the original Act (Sea. 15, ah. 466, p. 1785 at p. 1792, Oeneral and mealal Leve, Forty-fourthLaglelature,Soaond Called BeesIon), thw alerke of the aourte verw requlrwd to report aonvlationeto the Dwpartment of Publla Eafwty, end such mpcmte obviously aould not be aoalpellad fmm other jurledlatlone. In 1937, the Driver's License Lav vae mended (Ch. 369, p. 752, Oe era1 and Spoclal L&W. Forty-fifthLeglelrture, Regular Swe~lon7 by thw eddltion of awrtaln seatlane, lnaludlng amongothers, pwatlone 9-C end 16-A. eupre. Seation 15, re- quiring reports was also emwnded. It vae obviouelr thw legle- lative lntwnt by the eddition of Seatlone 9-C and 16-A to pro- vide a meone of suspendingor revoking the lloense of oae con- victed in mother Nate of an offense, whioh, if oomeItted In this Btate, would be grounds for euepenelonor revooatlanof the lloenee. Awlthwr SeatIon 9-C nor Seation 16-A, hovever, ebakesuah aotion mandatory. In Section 9-C "the Department 18 authorleed to suspend or revoke the liaenae, upon reaelvlng not-leeof thw aonvlotlonof euah person," ete. This le,nguege-lies thw exeralee of dleorwtlonon the pert of thw Dspartment. Iloprovision 18 mde for notice end hearing to one holding the llaenew prior to luah sotlo& Beotlon 16-A provides for notice end hearIng8 by t-h4Deprt- mwnt beforw euepwnslonor revoeetlon of the license is euthor- ired,' but by its teme, much eeotlon Is epwalfIoall~llmlted to the seven grounds enumerated. The seventh numbwrwd aauee thus llatwd Is not thw same es ehovn in Seotlan g-0, bwoeuew as ehovn above, there emat bw a "uonvlatlon*In thet awotlou, vhere- as Se&ion 16-A lwavwa it to the Dwpertnnt to dotermIne if the liawneww haa “aomUttwd* en offense. Bsoauee of this dletlnatlon, Swatioae g-C ad 16-A must be oonelderedas separate end dletfnat IIonornbloHomer Oarrleon, Jr., Page 6 pronouuoeaenteby the LegIeletum aad neither oen be construed as ln aid of the other. In your letter of inquiry for this opinion you asked whether in th4 wnfoxmmmnt of Seotion 9-C, lt vould be neaee- irary for the Departmentto hold hwarl.n&sln order to euepbnd a drlver~e llawneo of a resident of this State, upon r4oelpt of a oelrtlflwd record of conviction in another State. The delay oooaeloned ln rendering thle opinion Is attributable to a ltailar aasw in the Court of Civil Appwale. We refer to the cm4 oT Franaleao Q. Texas State Board of Dental Badnero (T. C. A. 1941), not yet reported, oplnlon filed, March 5, 1941. Under the facts la the Frenoleoo oatte ths appellant@8 lioenee to practloe dttntletry In the State of Texas van revoked by the Dental Board upon the gmund that he had been oanvioted of a forgery la the State of Oklahoma. Th4 order of the Dental revoking appellaat*elicense van regularly paeesd vlth- Board :. out notloe under the provlslantt of Artlole 4549 of the Revised Clvll 8tatute8, 1925, as emended, providlngt *The State Board of Dental Fmmlners &all have euthor%ty to euepend m r4voke 8 dental llaenee for eny one or more of the follwlng 4aueeet "a, Proof OS I.xmml.tjof the app114ant or holder of a lioenee. ea ad udged by the regularly oonetltutedauthor1ty. "b. Proof of the wonvlotlon of the ep- pellant or holder of the lia:yfy felony itlQOlQ~ StOti tuCpitUdS. . Thin provision van ettaaked (Louncwnetltutloualin falling to provide for e notlao, hearbkg, 04u2t reQfeW1p, appeal to any aourt, trlel by a jury, and n&loo of hearing before an lmpartlalboecdor oou2t, and right of appeal andreview. The quwetion before us van thus squarely preecmted ln thw Fra.noleoo aase. The uourt ealdt “Teetml by these rules, the prooedure pro- Qlded for the nvowtlon of lioen8ee undrr the 138 Hoa0prbl.w Homar&rrleon,Jr.,Pagw 7 provIeIoneof the etatut In question, olear- ly down vlolwnce to the invoked aonetltutlonel guarantees of due pracwee. Ilochereator of notice, hearing or rwvlev OS the order of rwvoastlon 18 provided. The order operates instanter,and thw llaenees Is at once de- prived of the right lawfully to praet:aw his profweelon. "It mey be ergmd thef the state bed thw right to provide thet the lloenee should be forfeited, ipso facto, upon aonvlatlonof a lelonp involvingmorel.turpitude,end elncw the Board 18 not vested vlth q diear4tIonery povwrs in the mttwr, notice and baring vould perform no useful purpose. The aomplete amever to thIe vlev, if it be otherwise sound, lies In the feat that the lwgieletur4hes not pro- vided for UI autometlo rwvoaation of the ll- oenew, but rwqulree au order of the Board. Until auah order of rwvoaatioa Is peeewd by the Boerd the license rwemlne ln offoot. Bw- fore thw Boerd oen Intelllgbntlyor properly eat t&be er4 a nu0ber of mnttere it emat ascertain. First emong three Is the Identity of thm llasneee vith th4 def4ndent In the Judgment o? oonvlation. If the oonvlotlonbe in mothwr jurledlotian,than ther4 er4 several awttere to be aeoertalnedwith refermoe to the Zev of such jurlediotlan. Among th4e4 would be thw jurledlatlonof the oonvlotlng Court, the eufflclenoyof the oertlfled reaord to show e final aonviatlonIn th4 &rfsdIction, the nature of the orlem undwrthe law of such jurlediotlonvlth relation to vhotber It be propwrly classifiedes of thw grade of felony and whether it 18 of luah ahapructer 08 to involve moral turpitude. Three are mettern as to whloh we believe th4 llaeuewe 18 entitled to a hearing beror4 his llaenee to praatloo 18 revoked. Proo4du~e authorielng its summy revocationvithout euoh right of notice and hearl,ngconetltutse,VW believe,'a denial of due prooesa under both stateend federal.OM- etltutlone." ~oaombloXomer~leon,Jlr.,Page 8 Thle ease was dwlded by the Austin Court of Clvll Appeala, and t&illsa writ of error ha* been applied for on behalf of the Ikntel Board, until the opinion as quoted 1s $I??~ or overrul4d,ve oannot &nut it as being other than . Under those olratmstanoeeIt Is our 0pInlon at thle time that there oaamot be am autortio nvooatlon and euepen- *ion by the Department of tha lloenee of a driver upon reoelpt by the Department of a oertlfled report of hle oonviotlon In l foreign State of one of the offenses named ¶.IIyour letter. We next oonelder a prooedum vhereby the Department of ?+ublioWety might loconplleh the came purpose by o lleaoe vith Seation 16-A, providing for e notioe aad depwtmnta"flllmu- lng, a ndlu th o r lelng th eDsp er ttnmt fr a th a aevlb u ath ou eed- s duo ed to suep a orndr o vo k tho e lluenee o fo ne vhoh e boon n fo u nd to have oomltted aa offense 2.nemothe~ Ilkte, vhloh, lf oom- a.itted3.n this Statw,wmldbegroumde formoh mepeneionor aevouatlon. Xn ammldering this @wee of pw inquiry, we em eonfronted vlth fhr,troublesow mblu of detemiming the mmning utd effect of tb vorde J&hieh &ml]. be held Ia a oourt o? oapetent juHedlotIoa,~ in Uu first eatatenoeof fb0t1m 16-k In an effort to uoerkin the leglelative&a- tent, w have traoed the hintor cU tha emmabtow Aat 0r 1937, vhloh as ve have pointed out, lneerted the rho10 of eald'eeotlon. ThoB1llwe er&lmlly lntroduoed latheEowee of1 neeata- tires a ndesp used b y th a t b o d yuld leo tltuamd 88 eztgl3.a ' aedtezi nov, exoept for the abwuwe of tbo lawuege . The uvndrntedsllngthevord~ 'irhiohehallbe lna 04urt of oampetent jurlodIotloa” me offered es e 44mWtt44 aae&nsntlntbo Sonata and88 abptedby thetbo@,w8 final- ly emoted aud ezvmnmd by the Bowrnor. See 8eaate &urnal, Forty-fI?thLeglelature,p. 1579. BQ explmmtlon o? the purpose or intent of tha ammdment le pemeptible In the journale of :ztou&of the Leglrlatwq, although ve here omefully . We en oonetrainedto the belief hht thq %neestian of the words 'in a oourt of 00mpdent jwIe&l.otlon ren6ew the vhale of seotlon 16-A so essentiallylnclefinlte, unoertaln and ._ HonorableHour Qamleon, Jr., Page 9 vague es to bring it squarelywithin the rule as stated in 39 Tex. Jur. 45, from which v4 quote* "Obviouslya statute - am? wapeaielly e orbtbral or pwnel rot L (end Sea. 16-h lo owrtalnlypwnelin Itsnature) shouldbe r4aeonnblyalear and plain, rJldits provl- 8iane so oertaln, definite and spwolflc that the enaotprentoan be understood nnd applied. et least vhon oonelderwd in aon- n~btlon~vlthother rote In mrl materla. 0 0 0. An lot that Is eeewntl.ally Indirr- lnltw, uncw~teln end vegue, and annot be understood from the language wed w from that of sow other lrZ!Ittwn law, Is lnef- foatlve, lnopeautlvw,unwnforeeabls and voLd. In ooiatwmplation of lav, a statute la manlnglass I? It le suacsptibl4of e variety of rPPan%ngs,and th4 r4al intent of ths fiegIelature is a 8etter af oon~wa- turw. Thus an eot is iavelld If the act sought to ?4 prohibT.ted or the duty sought to be Imposed oannot be determined there- iron vlth any dwgrwn of aertalnty.” (Farwnthaticallnewrtlonours.) The term *court of oomp4t4nt jurMIIotionm ordinarily m4anm a oourt "having povwrandeutkorlty of law atthbtias of acting to do thw particular aat.” 12 Coepue -is 836. It hae been dwflnwd l.nthle Slate ae ammIng 8 wourt having $uriedier- ;;goE;;Fe;$$ ~~~j$$ T;.*;~';~"1~~f@&-~, u~~t~;~y' 569; Boxa fEaiploJrers Insuranoe Aoso4letlon v. hnameker (T. C. A. 1925) 267 8. w. 749. As used ?n Section 16-A the l.sn&aegole lndlcatw thu situ8 of a dwpertae&Z hearing end a2t%i4~” tion 16-A nai ar\yother swation of tbs mtl& act pswv~dee for a aourt heartngfor orF@xaf doterPtlllstlon of vhethsr a 1104nae ohm swpwnded or rwvoked. &KttfoP 17 d006 provide for th4 right of appeal to the oourte, but that r5ght 1s pr%dioatedupon nom act or omieelon of the Despartmmt. go authcdty is giQbn l.n Swotlon 16-A to any courts nor are any duties 3aposwd Upon a judge. We thcreforw reluctentlyadvise you that i3wotloa 9-C Ie clwerly void under the ml.4 eaa4unmd in thw Fmbnaieoo aaaw, UDF~. 141 Xanoreble Eomea O~rrl~on. Jr., Page 10 Likevise In !%mtlora16-A the words %hiob ohs11 be held in a court of oompetant jurir8lotion*am ii0mgue, lndcflnlts end uaoertaln ae to make the plaor of heaPfng 80 doubtful aa to render the entire eeotlan void. We dlreot your attention to the saving olau8e 0r the Texas Drlver~e Lloenoe Law. We &a not, T %?$:",? hold any other part of the aot Invalid, exoep tione 9-O axnIl+A. Yours very trnlx