You request frOm this Department a ruling oh the constltutionality~ of Section 51, Article V of Senate Bill 172, 50th,Legislatwe, the Act Regulating Traffic on Blghways.

Se&Ion 51, Article v or the Act IS as r01- 1ovs: ~~,

“Every person who drlves any vehicle in willful or wanton disregard or the rightp or aarety or others OF without due caution or clrcrrmspection, and at a speed or la a manner so as to endanger be likely to en- danger a p&son or property shall be guilty 0r reckless driving."

Seation 143 of Article XVI of the Act makes It a misdemeanor for any person to violate any of the pro- visions of-the Act unless such violation is by the Act or other laws of the State declared to be ~a felony.

In our Opinion Ho. V-202 this Department con- aLdered Senate,Bill Ho.'172 and House Bill Ho,. 140, the companlo~ Bill, and In the course of the opinion we made general suggestions Involving the question of '&oustitu- tlonallty of 81-e of the sections of the Act, anioag them being Section vhich read as follovs:

'%very person who delves any vehicle In willful or,wanton disregard for the safe- ty of per&ma or property is allty of reck- less drlvink.". *2 Hon. Russell Graham - Page 2

In our Opinion V-202, after having called at- tention to the p~ovlaions of~~Artlclt I, Section 10 of our Constitution giving an accused . . . the right to demand th$ nature and cause of the accusation against him . . . and the provisions of Arttcle 6, V.P.C., ve said:

"The well recognized rule for construing a penal statute la, that if the statute Is so IndefInItely drawn, if It Is of such doubt* ful construction that It cannot be understood, either from the language in which It Is ex- pressed or from some~wrltten law of the State, It Is Invalid and void. Rx Parte Meadows, 109 S.W. (26) 1061 (Tex.,Crlm. App. 1937)." I

We then speciflcally~called attention to Sec- tion 54 (above quoted), and concluded by saying:

"Based upon the above quoted authorities, we question the validity of the above men- tioned sections from:the standpoint of being derinite. In the ltght of existing decisions on the subject, It is our opinion that auoh sections should be made more definite and spe- cific, and thereby ellmlnate the element of chance as to their constitutionality. By mak- ing such sections more definite and specific the Legislature will insure the constitution- ality or same."

The Legislature, after receiving our opinion changed Section to Section 51 and added per- (v-202), tinent features which It othervise did not contain.

As Section 51, Article V of the Act now stands we are unwilling to hold, in the light of the preceding decisions by our Court of Crlmlnal Appeals and our Su- preme Court, that the section la unconstitutional.

SUMMARY Sec. 51, Art. V., s. B. 172, Acts 50th Leg:, 1947, which is the~%ecklesb~ driving" provision of the Act Regulating Traffic on

-,

Hon. Russell Graham - Page 3

Highways, 1s sufflcieiitly definite to meet constltutional standards and is valid. Yours very truly ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TRXAS BY Ocle 3*&r Assistant BY --==?----o Charles D. Mathews Assistant 0s:cDM:jt

APPROVED: