R-144

XAS

March 26, 1947

Hoa. laoneg E. Lindsey Opinion No. V-104 County Attorney Upshur County Gilmer9Texas Re: Authority of just ice court andmunicipal court in State Highway law violations within corporate limits of municlpalltg, Dear Mrlr.

Lindsey: Your request for an regarding the above-captioned to the writer for reply, Wequote from your request opinion OSthis department, subject, has been referred in part as follows :

“I would like an Interpretation of Article 827a, Section 12 of the Penal Code, which has to dowith stop signs placed at junctions of maintraveled highwaysD

“Mys cific case is that within the tit limits of ilmer, Texas, State HighwayRo.

r 15$ andU. 9OHighwayMO,271 cross at right angles. Thejunction is one block off the town square. ?he State HighwayDepartment has placed stop signs against traffic of both higbvays.

“Thequestion Is, ‘mayviolators of these stop signs be proceeded against In justice court or must they be proceeded against in city court?’

“The city of Gilmer is Fncarporated and has a po ulatlon of approximately thirty-five hundred P3500)o The State Highway Department constructed these highways to the town square, and I understand does the maintenance on them.

“At the time one of these highways was constructed the City andthe HighwayDepartmententered into a contract whereby the Department agreed to construct said highway,.

.’

.

‘

.

.‘, ,,: ” Ron. LoOwy, R. Lindsey, Page 2,

In this contraot there is a ing: ‘It Is understood and the parties hereto that the V-104

provision readagreed between city, by virtue

_ .. of the provisions of its charr;er ana cne laws of the State of Texas, has exclusive control of andjurlsdlatlon of all streets and public ways within the Incorporated limits of said city, andthe city has reqwsted and has consented to the construction of the street project hereinabove named, andthe State, in the construotlon of the above-n-d street project, dose so at the l ,g: o-1 lnstanaa and request of the city. loeatlon, grade8 and mmnbr of the congggyg&g&gg: :: lpgy:;:a:y):* thereof 0 The State HighwayDepartmat of the State of Texas acts aa tha agent of the alty 

### jsct & the construction of the street prothersof. 1” &tlcle 62, Texas Code of Crldoril Procsdti,

“Acorporation court in each incorporated city, tovn or village of this state shall hare urisdiction within the corporate limits of alJ arm-1 cases arising under the ordi- ~naal) of such olt7, town or village, and #hall have concurrent jurisdiction with any jurtlce of the peace in any precinct in vhidh 88ld elty, town or village is situated, in all erlJBSAa1cases arising under the criminal laws of this State, In which punishment is by fine only, andwhere the maximumof such ffne may not exceed twohundred ($200.00) dollars, and arising vlthia such aorporate limits 0’ SeatIon 118, Volume 12, Texas Jurisprudence, ye: 396, after quoting the above statute reads as fol2

“This provlsioa expressly gives corporation aourta authority andjurisdiction to try offense8 arising out of violation of muuiclpal ordinances, and also to try offenses arising under the general penal laws of the State,, vithln the limits prescribed. (Cltlng numroua authorities) DHon. MooneyE. Lindsey, Page 3, v-104

“under the amendmentto the Coostitution giving the Leglelature power to leetablish such other courts as it may &aem neweesary) and prescribe the jurisdlctloa an&erganlzatlon thereof cyand to ‘conform the juriadiction of the district and other iaferlor courts thereto, p(Constitution, Article 5, Section 1) the Legislature, has power to give corporation courts jurlsdistioa to try persons for offenses against state lava. (Oiting numerous authorities) O In prosecution for offenses of this charrater, the carporation courts have jurisdiction concurzwatly with auyjustice of the peace in 

### alcly@aclnct in vhich the city is situated, In all cases where the maximumfine does not exceed twohundred ($200.00) dollars, If the offense has been camltted within the city limits; but the courts maynot be given juriaW.ctlon to try nls,demeanor offenses punishable by imprleonnmt, at least cities qmmtlug under the homarule provision of the Cctlatitutioa; nor may thsg Be olothed with eXeY.usive jurisdiction over infractions of state law, to the exclusion of gustioe courts, or other cowte created- by the Conatitution.n It is therefore the ruling of this department, that violators of State Highway lavs within the cor)crate limits of tha City of Gilmar sight be prosecute@ in either the justice court of your county, or the nu~lci~l court of the City of Gilmsr whenthe penalty shall not exceed two hundred ($2OO.OOj doll~s and nojail eentenoe is provided by statute,

The.corporatlon court of the Oity of Gllmer has conaurrent jurisdlut ion.with the just@8 courts of Upshur douutg, of violations of State Bigbvag laws vithin the corporate limits of the city, whenthe penalty shall uot exceed twohundred ($20@.@0) dollars and nojail sentence is provided by statute. (Article 62, C. C. ?a1Treeti~ tionnairea, w ew that the fonsolng aarwra reur emaYaws wrg tcnlys