Octo'ber 16, 1986 

Honorable Gale Warren 

Erath County Attorney 

Erath County Courthouse 

Stephenville, Texas 76401 

Dear Mr. Warren: 

Opinion No. JM-563 

Re: Authority of Tarleton State 

University campus peace officers 

You have requested OI;I opinion about the authority of campus 

peace officers at Tarleton State University to arrest persons they 

observe committing off-campus traffic violations. Your specific 

questions are: 

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 owned streets and highways passing 

through university owned lands considered within 

the jurisdiction XE campus security peace officers? 

3. Do streets and highways adjoining state 

university lands (come within the jurisdiction of 

campus security pe.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,zace committed within their view 

while outside the territory of their jurisdiction? 

Article 2.12, subdivirion (9), of the Code of Criminal Procedure 

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 committing a violation of 

any provision of this Act. 

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

Although this provisim could be read to authorize any peace 

officer, regardless of his normal jurisdiction, to arrest a person 

committing a traffic offense at any time and at any place in Texas -- 

and was so read in Christopher v. 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 campus peace officer was 

not lawfully discharging 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 Education Code]." 700 S.W.2d at 230. Cf. Love 

v. State, 687 S.W.2d 469 (Ilex. App. - Houston [lst Dist.] 1985, pet. 

ref'd) (city policeman). 

Section 51.203 of the Mucation Code provides: 

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.6 subchapter and may commission 

them as peace officers. Any officer commissioned 

under this section is vested with all the powers, 

privileges, and timunities of peace officers while 

on the property under the control and jurisdiction 

of the institutia~ of higher education or otherwise in the pe:?iormance of his duties. Any 

officer assigned -ko duty and commissioned shall 

take and filh the oath required of 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::s in 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 injured until the whole amount 

of the bond is remzovered. (Emphasis added). 

In answer to your first ant1 fourth 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 authorized a~ 

a part of their official t+ties as campus peace officers to arrest 

persons for traffic offenses or other offenses committed within their 

view but outside their territorial jurisdiction. Of course, they 

retain the authority possc!ssed by every citizen. as recognized in 

Preston, to arrest anyone without 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 arrest may subject that 

individual to liability for :false arrest or other tort. 

p. 2501 
.- 

r‘ 

Honorable Gale 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 

university property or adjacent thereto. 

Home rule cities SUC:I as 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 

legislature to 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 cities have 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'd w.o.m.). 

By statute, the legisl~~ture has conferred concurrent jurisdiction 

with police officers of the? city of Denton upon commissioned campus 

personnel to enforce all lms, including traffic laws, on any public 

street running through the property of North Texas State University 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 provisions have not ‘been enacted for the cityof Stephenville 

and Tarleton State Universit:y. Cf. Educ. Code gllO.l3(a) (Texas Tech 

University and the city of Lubbock) 

The failure of the legislature to provide for the exercise of 

such concurrent jurisdiction over 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 Stcphenville are peace officers but 

their territorial jurisdiction is limited. They 

are without authority to make arrests as peace 

p. 2502 
Bonorable Gale Warren - 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 

JACK HIGBTOWRR 

First Assistant Attorney Ger.eral 

MARY KELLER 

Executive Assistant Attorney, General 

RICK GILPIN 

Chairman, Opinion Committee 

Prepared by Bruce Youngbloot, 

Assistant Attorney General 

Very 

I 

truly you+l 

E - 1 

-G-i MATTOX 

Attorney General of Texas 

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

. 

RQ-607 

INDEX HEADINGS 

ARRFST 

CAMPUS PEACE OFFICERS 

CITIZENS ARREST 

JURISDICTION 

PEACE OFFICER 

STEPHENVILLE 

TARLETON STATE UNIVERSITY 

TRAFFIC OFFENSES 

p. 2504