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 Subsection 1 P a) 

inion 

o? 

Section a, Article 827a, Vernoa’8 Penal coqe, which 

relates to motor vehicle. apeed lliilts under cfrcumstancerr ~where special harards 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#ectioa or & railway grade crossing; 

approaching and going around a curve, when 

rhen 

approaching a hill orem!, when traveling upon 

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 controlled as may be necessary to av’old 

collldlng with any pereon, vehicle, or other 

conveyance on or entering the highway in compliance with legal requirenentr land the 

bf all persotis iib use -due care.” 

duty 

Section 8 of Article &‘?a, V.P.C., was re-enacted 

and amended by the 52nnd Legislature as H. B. 458, ch. 

346, p. 589, and it appears to be the Leglslature~s ,lnost 

reoent expreeslon respecting the,regulatlon of highway 

traffic. Apparently It ruperaedes Section 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 uncertainty in 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 Indefinite fashion 

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 lntellIgIble to 

peraona of ordinary Intelligence. Such a statute doea 

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. 

. . . 

Statutes vhlch~attempt'~~'deflne crltinal offenses 

in connection with the ~operatlon of motor vehicle8 might 

be said to'fall Into two general categolrlea. One type 

sets forth a aort of blanket prohlbltIon,dealgn'ed to 

cover numerous sltuatI?ns in which the exact nature of 

the culpable conduct cannot be precisely deacrlbed before It occura, as, for example, "reckless driving." 

Several Texas wenal statutes of this type have been 

declared void ?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 regulatory measures attempt to 

describe the epeclflc acts which are Intended to be 

prohibited, and atatutee of thle type have been more 

favorably received by the courts than those described 

In the preceding paragraph. The,proviaIon under conslderatlon here appetia to.fall Into this latter category. A 

eimIlar statute prohlbltltig motorlats from driving In 

excess of 5 reasonable and proper: speed, "having regard 

to $he width, traffic a@ uae~of .the highways and the 
Hon. Joseph C.~Te&aii:page 3~, (V-1562,). ' 

clalo~a"~wh~ch;:q~~d~e~~ the salldlty'of::AFt.~~f~.aL27a, 

~Sectlon 8, V.p;C'.."ae 'it retids:‘$&fa~.. ‘Bow t ,3&i '&$lcEJe 

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, f 9 %eg&'&les 

per hour, wall upheld over the objection that the quoted 

Taken as a whole, Article 8i7a,'&&iOn'8,' 

V.P.C.) Is an attempt to establish various maximum 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 

vehlclea under clrcumetancee where special hazards 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 'the stUdard.'of 'what 

la reasonable and prudent under the clrcninstaaeea. 

However, subsection l(b) prescribes deflnlte mll~e per 

hour speed llmlta for different types of vehIC&es operating under normal conditions, "where no epeclal hazard 

exists that re 

subsection l(a 7 

uires lower speed for compliance with 

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 :nuch an 

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 statute which has ‘been~ attached a@ vague, .and 

Indef lalte F ~ Such lava are frequeri%ly &all,enged on” 

this ground, an\f. ‘each case 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, def Inlte :& ‘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: AL 
Bon. Joseph C. Temua, page 5, (v-1562). 

where special hazards exist, describes 

with sufficient certainty 'the,orfense that 

It Is intended to prohibit and therefore 1,s 

constltutlonal. 

APPROVED: 

Wllllam S. Lott 

&ate Affairs Division 

Mary Kate Wall 

heviewing AsslQtant 

Charles Di Xathewa 

&rat Assistant 

,~ 

cbg/mlh 

Yours very truly, 

PRICE DAHIEL 

'Attorney Qeneral 

BY. 

caL+ B&.4&3&. 

Calvin ~B. Garwood, Jr. 

.’ Asslatant