OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS AUSTIN

Texas Liquor ControlBoard iionorable Zert Pord'; Administrator Austin, Texas 0-l-J opinionNo. o- .7073 Re: May a door or a liquo be moved from its aoo place in order to be than'thrsebun a churoh? And Mon. Dear Sir: Your request fbr and carefullyconsideredby your letter as r0u0w8:

las pertain to If the norbuildin& is within the mner or said sets -ihe

door baok, makranos projeotedrar enoughthat is within three hundred feet or the package store or beer parlor,E the permit be cancelled? I should likefor you to secure

### 362

,HonorabIe

Bert Ford - Page 2

a rulingfrom the Attorney Oeneralls Oliice on this provision, sitice

there is a dirreranoeof opinion here betweenthe ,oityinspectorand the enioroement orficsrs.~ WYiill you please give ~16 an opinioa oh the above desoribed situations. *I suggest that the underlinedword 'will' be changed to 'should'in sc Sar as your opinion 18 concerned." Article MM-25a, Vernon'sAnnotated Penal Code or Texas, reads as Sollowst

"The Comissionerst Court oS any county in the territory thereof outside incor~mtad citiesand towns and the @verning authoritiesoS any city or town within the corporate liaits OS say suoh city or town may prohibit the sale OS alooholiobeveragesby any dealerwhere the plaoe OS business OS any such dealer is within three hundred (300) Sect OS shy ahuroh,public school or public hospital, the measurementsto be along the property lines OS the street Sronts and from front door to front door and in direct line across intersections whera they oocur.w

r We quote f+rom the ease of Stubbe Y. Texas Liquor Control Board, 106 3. w. 2nd 178, as r0u0ws:

"The maning generallygiven by the courts to the phrase 'SromSront door to front door' is that, any door leading into thr, church or saloon ia a Sront door; in other words, it is held that a oburoh or saloon may have several rront doors and may raoe upon two or more streets)
. , . , In 15 R, C. L., pp. 372-373,the doctrine is stated that
. . . . 137. In applyingthe prohibitionsagainst saleshear churches,great llberellty 1s exercised,and the rule oS construction usually adopted is said to favor the religious institution, and not the traffiokersin liquor
. . .* The Courts or this State have not passed on a Snot situationas set forth in your letter;however, the Supren;e

### 363

HonorableBert Ford - Pac7.e 3

Court OS New York in,IlcOl, In re Chsney (72 N. Y, S, 134), under 4 similar Saot situation,statedas SolLowst

"The entrancefrom and to which distance is to be computed ror the purposeOS determining what buildings, if any, are within a radius OS 200 feet, Is the entrance or opening in the building oooupieAas a saloon. Such entranceor openfng in this case is ocntrolling, rather than the locationoS the door set baok Prom the wall in the entranceway." In reply to your rirst question, It is our opinion that when 4 city has enacteda valiA ordinanceprohibitingthe sale or alcoholic beverages within three hundred (300) feet OS any church, publio sohoolor publio hospital,that if the front doors OS a proposed liquor store and a churchare less than three hundred (300) feet apart aooordingto the system of measurement set Sorth in Article 666-25aoS Vernon'sAnnotated Penal Code as oonstrued in jtubbsv, Texas Liquor ControlBoard, supra, the wner or lessee of such building oannot defeat the very. purposeof the ordinanceby setting the swung Aoor back, in the xanner describedIn your request, so that it will be more than three hundred (300) feet Srom the front door OS the ohurch. It would not be proper to issuea permit or licenseunder such circu~~stanoes,

hs we have s.nswereA your first question in the negative, we do not believe it is necessary to answer your second question.

Trusting that the foregoing Sully answersyour inquiry, we ranain,
Very truly yours