GENEWAI;

December 22, 1952

Hon. Joseph C. Ternur bpinion no. v-1562. County Attorney San Patrlclo County Re: Cont3tltutlonallty df Slntoa, **Texas** SubbaectLon l(a), Section 

## a;Article 

## a27a,

v.P.c., relating to vehicle speed limits when ‘special hazards Dear Sir: exl8t.

Pou have requested o? thlr office an o concernin& the conrtitutionallty of Subsection1 a)

Pinion o? Section 

## a,Article 

## 827a, Vernoa ’ 8 Penal coqe, which relates to motor vehicle. apeed lliilts

under cfrcumstancerr

~wherespecialharards exist. The provis,lon In Quecrtlon

reads a0 fqllows:

“Ho pereon shall drive a vehicle on a highway at a apeed greater than is reaeonable and prudent under the conditions then existing, having regard to the actual and potential hazards when ‘approaahlng and crossing an inter#ectioaor & railway grade crossing; approachingand going around a curve, when **rhen** approachinga hill orem!, when travelingupon any narrow **or** vlndlap roadway, or when special hazard exist8 with respe.ct’ to pedestrians**or** other trafillc

**or** by reaoon of weather or highsway conditiona;;

and in every event, speed shall be 80 controlledas may be necessary to av’old collldlngwith any pereon, vehicle, or other conveyance on or entering the highway in compliance with legal requirenentr landthe bf all persotis

iib use -due care. ” duty

Section 8 of Article &‘?a, V.P.C., was re-enacted and amended by the 52nnd Legislatureas H. B. 458, ch. 346, p. 589, and it appears to be the Leglslature~s,lnost reoent expreeslonrespectingthe,regulatlonof highway traffic. Apparently It ruperaedesSection 51 of Article 670ld, V.C.S., the Uniform Traffic Code prohibition against reckless driving, a part of which was held unconetitutional

on the gound of uncertaintyin Rx parte. .

Hon. Joseph C. Ternua, page 2, (v-1562). 

# kik9-F 153 Tex. Crlm. 52, 217 S.W.2d 673 (1949). a the nature of the problem with which we are oonfrcgted

here.
Although a penal law will be declared void ii It la framed In such an obscure or Indefinitefashion that it cannot be readily understood (Tex. Conat. Art. I, Sec. 10; Art. 6, V.P.C.), the framera of the statute may employ general terslinology If It Is lntellIgIbleto peraona of ordinary Intelligence. Such a statutedoea not have to spell out all of the ways In wkilch the offense can be committed. Ex Da Tex. Crlm. 636, 218 S'.W. 1042 (1 143 Tex. Crlm. 9, 156:S.li.2d 531 rule was stated thus: I

"A pe'nai

atatkte is aufflklently certain, although ,I$

m&y use general terms, if the offenre la 80 'defined as to 'convey

to a person of ordlnaryIn~tellIgence an adequate deacriptlon of th$ 'evil

or mlechlef Intended to be prohibited.

. . .
Statutesvhlch~attempt'~~'deflne crltinal offenses in connection

with the ~operatlon of motor vehicle8might be said to'fall Into two general categolrlea.One type sets forth a aort of blanket prohlbltIon,dealgn'ed to cover numerous sltuatI?nsin which the exact nature of the culpable conduct cannot be preciselydeacrlbed before It occura, as, for example, "recklessdriving." Several**Texas** wenal statutes of this type have been declaredvoid ?or unceirtainty. Ruseeli-v. .State. 88 Tex; cdm. 512, 228 s.w..566 (11 Tex. Crlm. 355,:27 S.W.2d 1908 (l#Or LIuprB. )B): Ladd v. State, 115 % parte Chernoalq,

Other euch regulatorymeasures attempt to describe the epeclflc acts which are Intended to be prohibited,

and atatutee of thle type have been more favorablyreceived by the courts than those described In the precedingparagraph. The,proviaIonunder conslderatlon here appetia to.fall Into this latter category. A eimIlar statuteprohlbltltig motorlats from driving In excess of 5 reasonableand proper: speed, "having regard to $he width, traffic a@ uae~of .the highways **and** theHon. Joseph C.~Te&aii:page 3~, (V-1562,). '

clalo~a"~wh~ch;:q~~d~e~~ the salldlty'of::AFt.~~f~.aL27a, ~Sectlon8, V.p;C'.."ae 'itretids: ‘$&fa~.. ‘Bow ,3&i '&$lcEJe t 794; V*P';C

.,~.Bbr6iw

ita.r&pa&l'Bj'~~e.iprovuaian.rifrder,~ conslde$~~$~n

~h~ce;:bl+z!i$ng

"al~.~otor,a~'ic2ee",ga~,alng each other"~.fo.'redi~e"thei+ speed-to,

f9 %eg&'&les per hour, wall

upheld over the objectionthat the quoted

Taken as a whole, Article 8i7a,'&&iOn'8,' V.P.C.) Is an attempt to establish variousmaximum epeed limit8 for motor vehicles oper&tIng under all coricelvable driving conditions. Subaactlon l(a), with which we are speclflcally

concerned here, '&ale with the operation of vehlcleaunder clrcumetancee where specialhazards exist, and the speoI+,~~ga~s vh$@thq framare of the Act had in mlnd,are,apel~~&-opt: j& detail;‘ The speeg llmlts in thlb-partld~~~~"~~ba~ctlo~'~~~,not I+$ forth in term of miles per 'ho& i&i rathek-'by 'thestUdard.'of'what la reasonableand prudent under the clrcninstaaeea. However, subsection l(b) prescribesdeflnlte mll~e per hour speed llmlta for different types of vehIC&es operating under normal conditions, "where no epeclalhazard exists that re subsectionl(a

7uires lower speed for compliancewith of this section." In other words, aubsection l(b) authorizes a motorist to drive his automobile at the rate of sixty miles per hour on an open highway. . -

Hon. Joseph C
. Ternua, page., ~4,, (V;l2@).

.

under normal daylight, operating .oudltloqs,, but subsection l(a) requires that he reduce. ~hle ?$eed In aj

reagonable and prudent manner.~ when he approaches,a ; hataid :nuchan a curve,, ‘the crest of ‘a hill, qr;aii..Intereet&on, ,. _:/-‘I ~’ 

## xt is dirriqult to 

## p~Bdict: ‘ir~at.-:8~tl~~ ‘thi appellate courts.

:will~ take with .,r6@ecli'

to any given penal statutewhich has ‘been~ attached a@ vague,

.and Indef lalte F ~ Such lava are frequeri%ly &all,engedon” this ground, an\f.

‘eachcase a&ems,

to;,Y,&adl:‘on

Its own merits. However, It lr Important’ to ‘note that’

the nature of the offense created Is always of vita& lmbut fin ‘the field’

of’ tr ,J ., ~. ; .,,$ible: aetq” fig regulation,abgolute~’ and sufficiently,

defInlte :& ‘I&rlod of

P lf;e,,,. j=iai& peraopr or average’ lnte it creates; 1Igence of,++e‘Ii

If~:.jjrovIde

.a.. somewhat

‘fIeqlb~i.,sfiazju$@~ lnf lexlble +?+aa~~ds, are” not. aliraya pq#aIble:

and ecld pratitlcable

anddealrabIe. -ft.‘ls th@@fi$*e our oplni that Article 827a. Section 

## a, .SubaectIob’~l(a), v2.c:



## .~T, ‘, ‘

. W.idi 827;; 

## ‘seotioq.;J8; &&&&&. .-.: l(k), Y.P.C., ekitablIf+hlng:~ epeebl..lI 

## 1ta; ‘rbr motor vehldleq ope~atlng.under f. i%@d ,tiona:

,, j_-, _A..,, .,! ,.~ : ” -,

.. ‘ I.,~ /
I:. /. , ’

‘

_ :’

‘ I ‘

. ::’
i: ALBon. Joseph C. Temua, page 5, (v-1562).

where specialhazards exist, describes with sufficientcertainty 'the,orfense that It Is intended to prohibit and therefore 1,s constltutlonal.

APPROVED: Wllllam S. Lott &ate Affairs Division Mary Kate Wall heviewingAsslQtant Charles Di Xathewa &rat Assistant ,~ cbg/mlh Yours very truly, PRICE DAHIEL 'Attorney

Qeneral

BY. caL+ B&.4&3&. Calvin ~B.

Garwood, Jr.

. ’ Asslatant