Honorable H. D. Stringer 

County Attorney 

Hall County 

Memphis, Texas 

Dear Sir: Opinion No. O-5416 

Re: Lack of jurisdiction of Justice 

Court over a criminal violation 

of a city ordinance which vlolatlon is not a violation of any 

State Law. 

Your request for opinion has been received and carefully considered by this department. We quote from your request as follows: 

"I would thank you to advise me whether a justice of the peace would have jurisdiction to try a 

case involving a violation of a city ordinance In a 

city in which the justice of peace sits. Theris Is 

no violatlon of a state law involved. 

"SectIon 19, Article V, of the Constitution 

indicates that a justice of the peace may try any 

criminal case where the fine does not exceed $200.00 

but I have been unable to find a case llmltlng this 

to violations of the state law." 

Article V, Sectlon 19, Texas Constitution, provides 

In part as follows: 

"Justices of the peace shall have jurlsdlction in criminal matters of all cases when the Penalty or fine to be Imposed bx law may not be more than 

two hundred dollars. . . . 

Section 118, Crlmlnal Law, 12 Texas Jurisprudence,, 

pages 396-T-8-9, reads as follows: 

Criminil Pro,ed~~~p~~",~:~~s~ourts. 118 -- The Code of 

"'The corporation court In each incorporated 

city, town or village of this State shall have jur- 
7 

Honorable H, D . Stringer, pdge 2 o-5416 

isdiction within the corporate 

lnal cases arising under the OI 

limits In all crlml dlnances of such 

city, town or village, and shall have concurrent 

jurisdiction with any justice of the peace in any 

precinct in which said city, town or village Is 

situated In all criminal cases arising under the 

criminal laws of this State, In which punishment 

is by fine only, and where the maximum of such fine 

may not exceed two hundred dollars, and arising 

within such corporate limits. (Art. 62, C.C.P.) 

“This provision expressly gives corporation ! 

courts authority and jurisdiction to try offenses 

arising out of violations of municipal ordinances, 

and also to try offenses arising under the general 

pnal laws of the State, within the limits prescribed. 

“Under the amendment to the constitution glvlng the legislature power to ‘establish such other 

courts as it may deem necessary and prescribe the 

jurisdiction and organization thereof, ’ and to 

‘conform the jurisdiction of the district and other 

inferior courts thereto, ’ the legislature has power 

to glve corporation courts jurisdiction to try 

persons for offenses against state laws. In prosecutions for offenses of this character the corporation courts have jurisdiction concurrently with 

any justice of the peace ln any precinct in which 

the city is situated in all cases where the punlshment Is by fine only and where the maximum fine 

does not exceed two hundred dollars if the offense 

has been committed within the city limits; but the 

courts may not be given jurisdiction to try mlsdemeanor offenses punishable by imprisonment, at 

least in cities operating under the home rule provisions of the constitution; nor may they be clothed with exclusive jurisdiction over infractions of 

state laws to the exclusion of justices’ courts or 

other courts created by the constitution.” (Bracket 

Insertion ours) 

As far as we have been able to determine the question submitted by you has not been directly passed on by our 

Texas courts. However, ln the case of Ex parte Levine, 81 

S. W. 1206, where relator had been convicted in the city court 

of Corslcana for the violation of a city ordinance, we find 

the following significant language in the court’s opinion: 

“In regard to the corporation court in which 

relator was convicted, while I regard the effort 
Honorable H. D. Stringer, page 3 

in the charter to constitute that a state court as 

o-5416 

futile and without effect (here the court cited 

several authorities), still this was a case exclusively cognizable by a municipal court as such, and 

it had jurlsdictlon to try and Dunish relator upon 

convlctlon of a municipal offense Drovlded for by 

city ordinance." (Bracket insertion and underscoring ours) 

It is our. opinion that a justice court does not 

have criminal jurisdiction over a violation of a city ordinance which vlolatlon does not also constitute a violation 

of the penal law of the State. 

Very truly yours 

ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS 

By s/Wm. J. Fanning 

Wm. J. Fanning 

Assistant 

WJF:db:wc 

APPROVED JULY 1, 1943 

s/Gerald C. Mann 

A'ITORNEYGENERAL OF TEXAS 

Approved Opinion Committee By s/BWS Chairman 

i