Honorable Bert To*d, Adminirtrator 

Texas Liquor Control Board 

Austin, Texas 

Dear Sirt Opinion So. O-6569 

Rot Would a parron be permitted 

to tranlport liquor from a 

wet oounty to friend8 in a dry 

county without . permit? 

May tha Btrto forfeit 8m autcmobile rhioh ~88 not 8eitad atthe 

time the liquor -8 found? 

Your raquort forthir department18 opinion on th* following faota 

and question8 read8 in part a8 follow8: 

"That on or ndout July ZOth, 1944, 4 %a# driving hi8 

automobile upon the.8tnet.i of Oltiey, Young County, Texa8. 

The deputy rhoriff of Young Qunty, TBAB, 8.1 thm oar and 

8anuhat they thought maa whi8k.y and bar on the -ok seat 

of the oar.' There uwo four men riding in the oar, boluding the driver. Three of them war. intoxioated. Tk deputy sheriff and the oity marshal1 approached the oar ta make 

an inve8tigntion and found that they had 8avea quarts of 

whirkey and four oaaae of her in the oar. The offlsarr 

reired tb Ihi8key and beer and arrested A, who wa8 very 

drunk, ana permitted thb other8 to go home. They placed A 

in jail at Graham, Young County, Texar. Thy did not reiao 

the nutomobile at that tima. The Couxty Attorney's office 

filed a complaint and information on A for'po88esrion of 

whi8key for purpose of sale.' About two weeks later the 

Counfy Attorneyto offio* filed a oharge of 'illegal t~8- 

port&ion of liquor.* A and hi8 owpanion8 rt the time of 

l rreet olaianod joint ownership of the whiskey to the extent 

that eaoh one onned a quart of whiskey and that they brought 

three qurrhr back for other friend8 living in the town and 

that they were bringing a aaae of beer eaah to their friend8 

in Olaey, naming than a.~ B and three others. 

"Quortidm 1: Under the law would A be permitted to 

tranrport liquor to the8e friend8 without a permit? 

"Question 2: lbuld A be pwmittad to tranrport the 

liquor for hi8 friend8 ridbg with h@e in the oar without 

a permit? 
Honorable Eert Ford - Page 2 (O-6389) 

"Question 3r Could the sheriff, with the proper pnpers,.confiscate the automobile now or after the trial of 

the criminal case where it WIT not seized at the time that 

whiskey was seized? In other words, if it were seized, 

must it be asized at the time the liquor was found?" (Substitution of names in personal letter was made by this dspartment.) 

?R have oarefully considered the alcove stated questions and in 

answer to lbmixrs 1 and 2 direct your attention to Article 666-27(a) of 

Vernon's Annotated Penal Cods, which provides a8 follows; 

the same ib being transported, to-exhibit such &it&n statament to the Board or any of its authorized representatives 

or to nny psaae officer making demand therefor, end it shall 

be unlawful for any person to fail or refuse to exhibit the 

same upon such demand. Such written statement shell be accepted by such representative or office a8 prima facie evidence of 

ths lawful right to transport such liquor." (Raphnsis added) 

We believe the above emphasized seotion manifests in clear and unambiguous wording the legislative intent to render it unlawful for any psrson to transport liquor without the prescribed written statement from the 

Xpper. Therefore, xv answer your questions ??umbars 1 and 2 in the negative. 

J% have found no Texas deoisions bearing on your third question, 

but in view of the fact that Article 666-44, V.A.P.C., relating to the 

seizure and forfeiture of automobiles is patterned after and borrows heavily fran the former Federal provision of the Volstead Law (Section 26), 

passed on October 20, 1919, 41 Stat. 316, we are of the opinion that the 

case of United States V. Slusser, 270 Fed. 616, construing said section 

of the Volstead Law is controlling. 

Article 666-44, Vernon's Annotated Penal Code, reads in part as 

followsr 
Hon. Bert Fod - Page 3 (O-6369) 

"It is further provided thst if nny wagon, buggy, 

automobile, water or air craft, or any other vehicle is 

used for the transportation of any illioit beverage or 

any equipment designed to be used for illegnl manufacturing of illicit beverages, or any material of any kind 

which is to be used in the manufadurine. of illicit beverages, such vehicle together with all such beverages, 

equipnsnt., or material shall be seized without warrant 

by any representative of the Board or any peace officer 

who shall arrest any person in charge thereof. Such 

officer shall at once proceed against the person arrested and all principals, aocomplioss, and accessories to 

such unlawful act, in any court having competent jurisdiction3 . . ." (Emphasis added) 

Seotion 26 of the Federal Volstead Law reads in part ns followsr 

"Sec. 40. Wen the commissioner, his assistants, 

inspeotors, or any officer of the law shall discovur any 

mrson in the not of transWrtillF: in violation of the law. 

Intoxioating liquors in'ani wagon, buggy, automobile, nat& 

or air oraft.. or other vshiole. it shall be his d&v to 

seize any 'hiTa all intoxionti~g liquors found therein bQing 

transported oontrary to law. Whenever intoxicating liquors 

transported or possessed illegally shall be seized by an 

officer he shall take possession of the vehicle and team 

or automobile, boat, air or water craft, or any other oonvevanoe. and shall arrest aw nerson in ohnrEa thereof. 

S&h ~of?icar shall at once pboased ngninst t& person arrested under the provisions of this chapter in any aourt 

having oompetent jurisdiction: , . ." (Bnphasis added) 

The case of United States v. Slusssr, Supra, on page 620, headnote 

6, sets out the essential elements in the forfeiture of an automobile under 

Section 26 of the Volstead Law as followsr 

"(6) Third, ns to the right of restitution: The 

forfeiture of an automobile, under the twenty-sixth seation of the Volstead Law, must lx in strict pursuanoe 

to the terms thereof. United States v. H:rdes (D.C.) 267 

Fed. 471; the Goodhope, 266 Fed. 694. The following 

elements are essentialr 

"(1) That en offioer of the law discover 

scme person in the not of illegally transporting liquor in n vehicle. 

"(2) The seizure of the liquor so transported or possessed. 
Hon. Bert Ford - Page 4 (O-6389) 

"(3) The seizure of the vehicle and arrest 

of the persons. 

"(4) That fhs officer ,prooeed against the 

person atid r&&In the vehiole, unless redelivered 

to the owner, upon giving bond to return it to the 

custody of the offioer on the day of trial to 

abide the judpent of the court. 

"(5) Conviction of the person and order of sals 

of the vehicle. 

"(6) Distribution of the prooesds. 

"The highest degree of evidence, vizr that an officer 

of the law ~erceivs 8ome)~ person in the aot of illegal transportion, is n&ssary. Se&r8 of the vehicle can oniy ta made 

when liquor is seized. The law does not forfeit all vehicle8 

at some time used for illegal transportation of liquor, but 

only those taken in the act. One may be convicted of illegal 

transportation, yet the vehicle will not be forfeited, unless 

seized at the time. U. S. v. Eydss, supra. The seizing offio8r is to have the vehicle in possession on the diy of the 

trial of the person arrested, Eo abide the judgment in the 

8ame prov8eding. Should the defendant be acquitted, the 

automobile must be released, fbr it is only upon aonviction 

that its sale may be ordered." (Emphasis added) 

Thus, in 8n8wer to your third question, it is our opinion that the 

automobile must be seized at the time the liquor is found. 

very trW1y yours 

BMrdb:jrb:egw 

APPROVED M&Y 22, 1945 

/s/GROVER SELLERS 

ATTORNEY GKWRAL OFTEXAS 

Approved: Opinion Committee 

By GRIB, Chairman 

ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS 

By /s/Benjamin Woodall 

Assistant 

By /8/ Bob Maddox 

Assistant