Octo'ber 16, 1986

HonorableGale Warren Erath CountyAttorney Erath CountyCourthouse Stephenville,Texas 76401
Dear Mr. Warren: OpinionNo. JM-563
Re: Authority of Tarleton State University campuspeace officers

You have requested OI;Iopinion about the authority of campus peace officers at Tarleton State University to arrest persons they observe committing off-campus traffic violations. Your specific questionsare:

1. Does article 6701d. section 153, V.T.C.S., authorize the arrest by [such] peace officers for traffic offenses committed within their view; but outside their ter'citorial jurisdiction? 2. Are state ownedstreetsand highwayspassing through university owned lands considered within the jurisdiction XE campus securitypeace officers? 3. Do streets and highways adjoining state university lands (comewithin the jurisdiction of campus securitype.sce officers?
Do campus security peace officers have jurkdiction to arrest for violations of traffic offenses or other minor offenses not involving a breach of the p,zacecommitted within their view while outside the territoryof their jurisdiction? Article 2.12, subdivirion (9), of the Code of CriminalProcedure identifies officers commisr+med by the governing board of any state institution of higher edumtion as peace officers. Section 153 of article 6701d, V.T.C.S.. the Uniform Act Regulating Traffic on Highways, reads:

Any peace officeI.is authorized to arrest without warrant any person found committinga violation of any provisionof thisAct.

p. 2500Honorable GaleWarren - Page,2 (JM-563)

Although this provisim could be read to authorize any peace officer, regardless of his normal jurisdiction, to arrest a person committinga traffic offense at any time and at any place in Texas -- and was so read in Christopherv. State, 639 S.W.2d 932 (Tex. Grim. APP.-82) -- its meaning is not so broad. The Court of Criminal Appeals, overruling the Christopher case, held in Preston v. State, 700 S.W.2d 227 (Tex.Crim~~~p. 1985), that a campuspeace officerwas not lawfullydischarging an official duty when he attempted to arrest a person for an off-campus traffic offense. This, "because he was then acting outside of hi;,jurisdictional limits as prescribed by section 51.203 [of the EducationCode]." 700 S.W.2dat 230. Cf. Love v. State, 687 S.W.2d 469 (Ilex. App. - Houston [lstDist.] 1985,pet. ref'd) (citypoliceman). Section 51.203of the Mucation Codeprovides:

The governing 'mards of each state institution of higher educatbm may employ campus security personnel for the purpose of carrying out the provisions of thl.6subchapter and may commission them as peace officers. Any officer commissioned under this section is vested with all the powers, privileges,and timunitiesof peace officerswhile on the propertyunder the controland jurisdiction of the institutia~ of higher education or otherwise in the pe:?iormanceof his duties. Any officer assigned -ko duty and commissioned shall take and filh the oath requiredof peace officers, and shall execute and file a good and sufficient bond in the sum o:l$1,000,payable to the governor and his 8uccesso::sin office. with two or more good and sufficient sureties, conditioned that he will fairly, imp~rrtially,and faithfully perform all the duties th.lt may be required of him by law. The bond may be rued on from time to time in the name of any perscn injureduntil the whole amount of thebond is remzovered. (Emphasisadded).
In answer to your first ant1fourth questions, in view of the Preston v. State holding of the Court of Criminal Appeals, we advise that Tarleton State University campus peace officers are not authorizeda~ a part of their official t+ties as campus peace officers to arrest persons for traffic offenses or other offenses committedwithin their view but outside their territorial jurisdiction. Of course, they retain the authority possc!ssedby every citizen. as recognized in Preston, to arrest anyonewithout a warrant for a felony offense or a breach of the peace committed within their presence or within their view. Code Grim. Proc. art. 14.01(a). See Rome v. State, 577 S.W.2d 251 (Tex.Grim.App. 1979). However, anysuch arrestmay subject that individual to liability for :false arrest or other tort.

p. 2501.-

**r ‘**  HonorableGale Warren - Page 3 (JM-563)

Your second and third questions ask about the jurisdiction of such officers on state-owned streets and highways passing through universityproperty or adjacent thereto.
Home rule cities SUC:Ias Stephenville, where Tarleton State University is located, have exclusive dominion, control and jurisdiction over public streets in the city, subject to the power of the legislatureto place control elsewhere. V.T.C.S. art. 1175; State **V.** City of Austin, 331 S.W.Zd 737 (Tex. 1960). However, it is a dominion, control and juris~i:lction which the citieshave no authority to delegate to others; that,discretion is lodged in the legislature. City of El Paso v. Mendosa, 191 S.W.2d 102 (Tex.Civ. App. - El Paso 1945,writ ref'dw.o.m.). By statute, the legisl~~ture has conferredconcurrent jurisdiction with police officers of the?city of Denton upon commissioned campus personnel to enforce all lms, including traffic laws, on any public streetrunning through theproperty of North Texas StateUniversity or Texas Woman's University, and on any public street immediately adjacent to property owned, occupied or controlled by the universities. Educ. Code §§105.91(a), 107.81(a). It has also authorized the city of Denton, by contract, to delegate to the universities the authority to regulate parking on those streets. Id. 1105.93. But similar provisionshave not ‘been enacted for the cityof Stephenville and Tarleton State Universit:y.Cf. Educ. Code gllO.l3(a) (TexasTech Universityand the city of Lubbock) The failure of the legislature to provide for the exercise of such concurrent jurisdictionover streets running through or adjacent to the property of Tarleton State University and other universities, by contrast, clearly indicates a legislative intent that such concurrent jurisdiction shculd not exist. Consequently, in response to your second and third questions, we answer that campus peace officers of Tarleton State University have no jurisdiction as peace officers over state owned public streets and highways passing through university owned lands or a(ijacent thereto.
In sum, campus peace officers at Tarleton State University are peace officers, but their territorial jurisdiction is limited. See Preston v. State, supta. Yhey are without authority to make arrex as peace officers outside Iheir jurisdiction, and the public streets and highways running through or adjacent to university property are not within their jurisdiction. SUMMARY
campus peace officers at Tarleton State University in Stcphenvilleare peace officersbut their territorial jurisdiction is limited. They are without authority to make arrests as peace

p. 2502BonorableGaleWarren - Page 4 (JM-563)

officers outside their jurisdiction,but may make citizens arrests in proper cases. The public streets and highways running through or adjacent university property jurisdiction. are not within their

JACKHIGBTOWRR FirstAssistantAttorney Ger.eral
MARY KELLER ExecutiveAssistantAttorney, General
RICK GILPIN Chairman,Opinion Committee Preparedby BruceYoungbloot, AssistantAttorney General VeryItrulyyou+l E - 1 

## -G-i MATTOX Attorney General of Texas

p. 2503Honorable GaleWarren - Page,5 (JM-563)

.
RQ-607

INDEXHEADINGS

ARRFST CAMPUS PEACE OFFICERS CITIZENSARREST JURISDICTION PEACE OFFICER STEPHENVILLE TARLETON STATEUNIVERSITY TRAFFIC OFFENSES

p. 2504