*1 Iionorahle R. J. %onan
.Distriot Attorney. Opinion No. O-2229
Honda * Texas Rer Registration of automobile in wunty other than resi- $jeeai: sir*
dence of registrant. 7% have for reply your letter of April IS. 1940, requesting the opinion of this.department upon the following question, which we quote from your requests .i~
"noes a person who 8eoures an automobile license in ~8 wunty other than the county of his residence violate the criminal laws of TexasS' ,~ Article 6675a-2, Vernon's Annotated Civil Statutes, provides for the regi&raticn motor vehioles end reads in part as follows:
"Rvery owner of a motor vehiole, trailer or &mi- trailer used or to be used upon the public highways of this State, and each chauffeur, shall apply each year to theState Highway Department throughthe County Tax Collector of the County in nNch he resides for the registration of each such vehiole owned or aontrol- led by him, or for a chauffeur's license, for the en- suing orcurrent calendar year or unexpired portion thereof; .'. ." (Underscoring ours).
Article 604 of Vernon's Annotated Penal Code providesthat: "Whoever operates upon any public highway a motor vehicle which has.not been registered a8 required by law shall be fined not to exceed two hundred dollars." Consequently, it may be seen that Article 806 of Vernon's Annotated Penal Code, has made it unlawful for one to operate an automo- bile which has not been registered as required bylaw and Artiole 667Sa-2 has imposed a requiranent;on applicants for registration that motor ve- hioles be registered~,in the county of,their residence.
With 'this in mind, your question is whother'or not &Mole 6675a-2a of Vernon's Annotated Civil Statutes qualifies the requirement of registration in the oounty of applicant's residence or obviates such *2 Hon. R. J. Roonan, Rage 2 (0-2229)
requirement to the extent that registration in a county other than that of applicant'6 resideno. is not a misdemeanor under hrtiole 804, V.&P.& Article 6675a-2a, V.A.C.S., reads a6 follows:
*Nothing in this hot shall authorize any prson to be subject to penalty this law on aooount of his place of residenoe intN6 State, nor the oocupa- tion pursued."
Our Texas Court of Crdminal Awals had the verJl question you propound before it in 1936.in the 086s of Opp v. State, 130 Tex. Crb. Rep. 314, 94: S.7?. (2d)'180. ; There appellant lived in Rexar County, lbnas, and " opened' his' thqlf in that county. Ewever, he registered it in LaSalle
County;~Telrirs~~&d I&& convicted in the loner court for operating an unreg- isfered autonpbi~e. : Onappeal the Court of Criminal Appeals said: ,,,~.~ .~ a,
"The only'quebtioa'involved Ys'whether owner6 of cars residing in this state may operate thenunder nunber plates and lioense obtained as a result of . ~registration of such oar6 in a &m&y other than
the one ofth~.alsler's..reaidsrroe. te think the law requires the regiatratiw of the &r~inthe county of the residence. Looking to ohapter 23, Lots Fifth Called Seseion;.41st Legislature, 193O(Vemon's Ann.
Civ. St. &t.':S67Sa-1 etseq.); reob6erve that in section 2 (Vernon's &nn. Civ. St. art. 6675a-2) there- of',itis ~statad in so many words that WI ~applicant for the'registratiti of a car must register the 6me ,in the countywhere he resides.' Appellant contends that section 2a of said enactment (Vernon's Ann. Civ.
St. art.66754-2a) sas intended .to mean that a oiti- 6en in this state who seed fit to register his car in sme county other than the one of his residence may do sd and oannot bs prosecuted for the operation of such car upon the ground'thai he did net register it in the aounty of his residenoe. Said seotion 2a is as 'follOrr6: 'Nothing in this 4&t shall authorize any per- son to be subject to penalty of this law on account of his place of res'idence in this %ate, nor the oc- oupation pursued.' Pw are not particularly-interested h& said section 2a got in said-act, but note that it was not comprehended by the caption, which specifies definitely what the'titended amendments to the auto- mobile registration law 6houUbe. The said section 2a is entirely meaningless,; Nothing in the amended sot 6eams to seek to subject any one to punishment be- cause of hi6 place of re8idehae or occupation. To hold a6 appellant oontends would be to say that though in plaoe the Legislature definitely laid down the *3 Hon. R. J. Noonan, Page 3 (O-2229)
requirement of registration in the county of residanoe, in the next paragraph of the same aot they said this re- quirement meant nothing, and that cars aould.-bs register- anywhere the owner desired. Re note that fn two OILSUS our Courts of Civil kuoeals have held that oars may onlr be registered in the &nty of the osner's reside&e. - 9ee Riller et al. V. Foard County et al., 59 S.11. (2d) 277, and Cass County V. Morris County, 9 S.77. (2d) 373.'" (Undersaoring ours).
It is therefore the opinion of this department and you are respectfully advised that a prson registering his automobile in a county otnar than that of his residanoe will be guilty of violating Artiole 804 of the penal Code when he operates the same upon the public highna~~s of this state under such registration. This is with the qualification, however, that an "owner'" as that tena is used in Article 6675a-2, V.A.C.S., may 56, a parson who has the legal title, legal possession, or legal oon- trol of the vehicle* See Opinions O-2050 and o-2105, copies of uhiah are enclosede
Very truly yours ITl’ORRbY GENERAL OF TJSAS By /s/Talter R. Koch Walter R. Roth kssistant APPROVhXk Opinion Committee By Bm CHbIM