THEATTORNEY GENE
OF TEXAS

Mr. Jack Ross, Chairman Opinion No. C- 13.5 Board of Pardons and Paroles BOX 2176 Re: Whether House Bill 395, Capitol Station Acts of the 58th LeglslaAustin, Texas We, Regular Session, Tg63, Chapter 327, page ,857,when In effect, will govern the age limits set for parole officers,or whether the provisionsof Article 781d, Section 28, Vernon’s Code oS~Crimlna1 Procedure,will apply as, to age limits of such Dear Mr. Ross: officers.
Tou have requestedan opinion from this office upon the question of whether:

8, govern tiie*a;5e

Ii. B. 395, when in effect, will limits set for parole officers employedby this department,or should this Board continue Iits compliancewith Article 78ld, Section 28, C.C.P.” Section 28 of Article 781d, Vernon’s Code of Criminal Procedure,provides in part that:

II no person may be employed as a parole oh&&r or supervisor,or be responslble for the investigations, surveillance,

or supervielonof persons on parole, unless he meets the followingqualifications together with any other qualifications that may be specifiedby the Mrector of the Division, with the approval of the Board of Pardons and Paroles: 26 to 55 years of age, . . .‘I (Emphasisadded) Section 2 of House Bill 395, Acts of the 58th Leglslature, Regular Session, 1963, Chapter 327, page 857, provides that: “No agency,board, commlsslon,department, or institutionof the governmentof the -573-Mr. Jack Ross, Chairman,page 2. (C-115 1

State of Texas, nor any political subdivision ',' of the State of Texas, shall establisha maximum age under sixty-five (65)years nor a minlmum age over twenty-one (21)years for emplogment, nor shall any person who is a citizen of m State be denied emnlovmentbv anv such agency, board, commlssibn,"departme&"orlnstitution or any political subdivisionof the State of Texas solely because of age; provided,however, nothing In this Act shall be construedto prevent the impositionof minimum and maximumage restrictions for law enforcement peace officers or for Sire-fighters;

provided, further, that the provisions of this Act shall not apply to instltutlons of higher educationwith establishedretirementprograms." (Emphasisadded)
House Bill 395 makes no reference to Article 781d nor does House Bill 895 contain any repealing clause within its provisions.
For House Bill 395 to act as a repeal of Article 78ld, there being no express or general clause found In House Bill 395, such a repeal would have to be by implication. 39 Tex.Jur. 137 Statutes,Sec. 73. In addition It is stated in 39 Tex. Jur. 140 Statutes,Sec. 75, that:

11 the repeal of statutesby implication Is never’&v&ed or presumed. The two acts will persist unless the conflicting provisionsare so antagonistic

and repugnant that both cannot stand. Where there Is no express repeal, the presumption Is that in enactinga new law the Legislaturelntended the old statute to remain In operation. "Accordingly,

a repeal by implication will be adjudged only when such result is inevitableor was plainly Intendedby the Legislature. IS by any reasonable constructiontwo acts or statutoryprovisions can be reconciledand so construedthat both may stand, one will not be held to repeal the other. Especiallywhere the older law ls.partlcular and Is expressedin negative terms, and the later statute is general, a construction will be sought which harmonizesthem and leaves both in concurrentoperation.

. . ."
In view of the foregoing.ltis to'be noted that House Bill 395 merely provides that no agency board, commission,d,epartment, or Institutionof the govern&t of the State of Texas

-574-Mr. Jack Ross, Chairman,page 3,. (c- 115 1

shall establisha maximum age under sixty-five (65) nor a minimum age over twenty-one (21) for employment. However, the age restrictionsplaced upon parole officers employedby the Board of Pardons and Paroles,as set forth in Article 78ld, is a restriction placed by the Legislatureof the State-ofTexas rather than by an agency,board, commission, department,or Institutionof the governmentof the State of Texas. Consequently,

we are of the opinion that the provisions of House Bill 395 do not act as a repeal of Section 28 of Article 78ld, Code of CriminalProcedureenactedby the Leglslature whereby the Legislatureset certain age restrictions as to these employees.
SUMMARY

The provisionsof House Bill 895, Acts of the 58th Legislature,1968, Chapter 827, page 857, do not act as a repeal of Article 781d, Section 28, Vernon's Code of Criminal Procedure,and therefore the provisionsof Section 28 of Article 781d, rather than the provisionsof House Bill 895, control as to the age restrictionplaced upon the employmentof parole officersby the Hoard of Pardons and Paroles.

Yours very truly, WAGGONER CARR Attorney General

PB:wb:zt
APPROVED: OPINION COMMITTRH W. V. Geppert, Chairman C. L. Snow, Jr. Scott Garrison Paul Phy Bill Allen REXCNWDFORlHRATTORNRYGHNRRAL BY: Stanton Stone 

# 42

Assistant

-575-