Case Information

*1 OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS

AUSTIN

-c.wurn --

J&4 Eonorcrble Pmnk B. xurmy 0 -=J-q kttmwy careon cmnty

Panhadle, Texas

Dear Sir:

Under date 939, you oubnllt ior apini0~3 this depe OWil3& QUWtiOll, UhiOh

~0 quote rrom YQOU~ lstt0

utomobile while tru8tee iTom tatutes, provlber , In mmlriaks 1. State es awl. iiokferra, 49 3. x. 708, tha pueatlon lnvQlve4 +as uheth#r a P0.bo01 truatas +ga

e aountp orr1oer. That court W&e& fo~Unuirtg lWk#.ua&ea

Rozmrable lraak R. Xurray, Page 8

'Each of thsa Is an ofiiobr in and r0r tllb pmolnot OS oounty of uhioh his pmolnot is a part, and oonsequsntly of the itself; and we think thsro should bs no dirrioulty in oonstruiag ths Constltutlonmd ths statutes as lnoladlng the oiiioers of pmolnot and dls- triots of a oouaty in the gotma dssignation 00uty orriotm .-

Ths Handrloks ease was approved by ths Supreme Court of Texas in the case 0i BoruiSr 7. Bslstsrling, 104 Tot. 432, and ths oourt us88 the iollowia(ll lasguags: "In that MS0 (Efsadrloks v. stats) the dlstrlot we8 a SubdivislOn of a oounty and the trustss derlvsd his authority solely from the gsasral law which applied to the oounty. Be was thsrs- fore an oitlosr in the oounty Lo the sass sansTTaZi6~ Jiimoo znxirp%aoe .*

see FoWlOr st al vb ThO#S st al, E!76 S. w. 863, and authorities oltsd themln, holding that a. sohool trss~ tse 18 a oounty otilosr.

ws oonelude that sohool ttites is a ooasty otflosr within hrtlale bQ68, Rerlssd Civil Statutes, lOi%, Artfit 49. an41 a rdmy in ths cods, dotine iollowlng language:

-'Aax offense whioh may - sot must - be ppurlsh- able by death or by oonflmaxmt la the palten- tlary ls 6 felOw; * l l " wei also call yaw attention to tbs oplnfoh by

Judge Hawkins in the aaue or 3. r. Oordon v. state, 185 -i-a. crlanlnal Reports 438, uhloh sets out the prorfslona OC Artl- 018 808, an6 OOMtmlng sams. The FuntU Cod%, 88 emon&d, opfnlon, in pekrt, reeds as fol$ows:

"Artlols SOZ, ?. C., as ammdod, Acts 1989, 45th Legislature, chap. 60, 0. 108, provldos: *Any psrsm uho drive% or Opsratss an automobile or any other Eotor rshlole upon any streot et alley, or any'othsr plaoe within ths limits 0r any lnoorporated city, town, er village or upon any pub].%0 road or hlgbway la tRisState while smh psrson is latoxicated, or in any degme under the influanos of intoriaatl~ liquor, shall

Honombls Fmnk E. Murray, ;age 5

upon aonvfotlbn be uonflmd In the penltsntiarp for not mom than two (2) years be aonflned in ths aountg jail for not less than iire (5) days nor more than alnsty (90) days and fined not less than Fifty Dollars ($SO) nor mm than Biro Iiundrsd Dollars ($500).* The punlshmbrrt psraltted may In the dlsomtlon of the court jury bs oonflnemnt In the psnltsntlary and the 0rra0 IS th;smrom rdollj. or by ten38 of the statuts ths jury Is at liberty to Inflict SOIIUB mllder punlshmsnt than irprlsonntsnt ln ths psnltsntlary that does not pmvent the offsnso rrop bslrrg a relony. csapboll v. State, ee ~exss Crlm. Rep. 262, & 5%. W. 6ZS; Smith v. State, US Texas Crlm. Rap. 88, 26; s. 1A. (ed) 350.”

We also oall your attention to 95 A. L. R. 1116, and authorities cited themI&

.WI oonuluds tram ths authorltles oited In thls opInlon,that the oonrlotlon. of a ash001 trustee for drlr- ins an automoblls while Intoxlsatsd wIl1 dIsaualIW suoh trikes rmfi said oftios and mnasr hia subjiot tdm- mowal themfrom.

rours very truly ATTORXBT C4EREEAL OF TEXAS By -5!iri&dd

issIstant