Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion

OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS
AUSTIN

lioaorabla C. 2. Pettersan
County AttQm%y
Brawater CQUBty
, Plplne , Texas

da aa follovs I

DP1ea6e advise if n hm the right
anythiag other
As. en example,
ch a person oad
aaceF teln 1 tretiQQ card.”
Commlsalon, end its depu-
to as “gag! vardelu” me
exa8 aad a8 much the lau
duty to %nforce the rtat-
otectloa and prerervatlota of
.” nrticle 906, veraon’a An-

cases of vi?latlons of the ane 18~s vlth tha seem authorltg
as the sheriff. PrtlcleS 4%3 end 905, V.A.P.C. Also, they
“mg arest without a varrent cay poreon found by theta ia the
act af violatiag any of the levs for the grotootlm end pope-
Eation of ~UII~, wild birds or Slsh. . . . rftlcle 905,
V.F.P.C. zurthermoy3, a pa werdeo nay search a *game bag
or other raaegtacle aed amy b-y, uagon, automobile, or
other vehlclc vithout a. warrant v&tell he ‘
hae rcasm to 8un-
pcct m thet lt “may coatetn &em unlawfully killed ar taken, *
aonorable C. 3. Bitterson, page 2

Articleb d97 and 9234, V.A.P.C. Furthermore, 6 game varden
la espouered to “enter upon my leads or veter where vlld
game OT fish era knovu to reuge or strex fop the purpose of
enforcing the game sad fish laws of this State. . . .*
We are not reeking to enumerate all enforcement
povera of
the Geme, Fish Q Oystar CoPsnlseloa UQ~ its deputlee
but It 18 sufficient to eey that they me numerou8 cud a8 a
8SWWk1 prQpOSitiOl%, UC thiQk the 0ffiCie.l SCtS Of eUCh Of-
ficers rust aoncern or be directed toverd the enforcement of
the gme end f lsh leve. Us fell to find aar authority for
eecnch by gem verden unlesn it is la mcme vay portiasot to
the lewe he its charged with enforcing. Thus, we do not see
vhet right 8 ~SJESwarden would have to seerch a pereon sole-
ly for the purpose of aecerteletrrg if he poraeseed a draft,
card where no gene law violetlon op suspected violation uas
1 nvolved . Bovever, ve do uot vfrh to be underetodd es hold-
ing that the search of a person and the eraminathx of h~.s
pareor. affectr by a game warden vould in no event be verrant-
eil by Iev. Xt is a Veu reaogaLted prlnolple of law in Texer
that where a pemaon has beeo legeilp arrested, a ranch of his
person ecd psreonel effect8 without a warrem ia permitted 8s
an 1acLdeat of the arrest. 3ae 4 Texas Jurisprudence 7901
51 A.L.B. 424; Havlep v. State, 2% S.U. 556; Rutherford v.
State, 121 9.W. (ad) 342,arMerrLck v. Atate, 167 S.Y. (26) 743.

It is QUQ elncere hope that this op%nion vlll prove
tQ be Of #ORW SSS%S64%UCS tQ gOU.

Yerp truly yours

BY

EP:db