**OFFICE OF**  **THE** AlTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS **AUSTIN**

Eon. lhrt rora, Aaalln1atrator Texex~nLluor Control

, Rxw Roard

bar Sir:

This will aokn

ertlon 30. 9 therein been comlotea o? a ext 

### preordlng the fllby the Tmi8 Liquor Control that tb ap~~ioont on Kar 19, oanrloted in the DLtriot Court 

## railm6 to stop and render **aid** 0.00, to whlOhaotion of the Dipappeal hadbeen filed In the Court ary 16, **peals 05**  L'ay p9, 1939. OnFrbm1958thn ocntiotlon wa(LLI afilmed by the Court of Crlalrial Appeals and appellant~r aotloa ior rcheartlrcr wa@overruled on Maroh 0 lPl% an6 amandataef the Court or Crlmina38 raa issued onApril 1, 1936. lrppsalr

HJ*xAI)*y I. ,cd .* cl3*m,,.n

. . . . . . . . . Y-Y-.. ^_. -

### ,4:

Rcn. Dart ?ord, I’aep 2

The lioeneee has been olted to a pear nad rhou ouuaewhytha license rhould not te oan**aelled** for the rearon that in 

### herepplloetion ior u beer retall lloenae dated koe~bbr 12, lQS9ln 

### atamer

to Neetioa Fo. 9the lloeneee npmsented that ehe hadnot been conrioted ot a relonp althln twoyemronext preoedlng the rlllnff of the 

### l

pplIaatlon, wherear in truth end in lad the lloeneoe had been oomloted a6above set out.

***16** the fiat&l **OOUViOtlon** of the **c0Ul-t Of**  CrlmInel Appeala, it oominq wlthln a twc year period **next** preoedlng the 

## rinnr: **0r** 

## theaplloetlan, euoh 8oontlotlon ae to warrent tto oancellation of the lloenee **by** the ~dnlnletretor ror the reneone stated?” Youedviee that the holder cf the retail beer lioenee involved ln thin Inquiry wee oanvlated In the DIetriot Court on by 19, 1937. Thereafter, the oa.80 me **duly** appealed, oonsldered andafflrzxtd. isitar the efflmanoe, the **hurt a?**  Crlnlual **Appeals** overruled appellant’s notion for rehearing end issued its mandateon Aprfl 1, 1930.

&-tic lo 667-5) Yenal Gx3sar %xcLe 1925, reta aut la detail the requleltee or the applloetlon rhloh shall be ills4 byu pereon deeirlnp, e retail berr license. Subdlvlelon (1) thereof, under heedln~ ‘%anufaoturer” lllcerlae applloable to a rota11 beer dealer, provides, enong other things, that the appl?oant rhow“that he hee not been oonrloted cf P felony within tuo-te) yeere Immedlately pre**06aing** the

## ruing of euohapplloutloa,* A8noted frcrn the opinion request, hereinabove **qutiod,** the lioensee inrolved herein madesuch appliaatlon on Deoe?sber 12, 1939, andthe lloenss ue~ Ienued by the %erd oa Deoezber **27,** 1939, rSloh dates were leea than twoyears after the mendate of the **court** 0r C~LUIM~dipppedlm.Tour opinion request reeolvee Itself lata the proposltlon of whether or not the *oomlotIonWrererred to In the epplicatlon **hnd** rsfsrenoe to the

cud(gaent,andsentence In the trial oourt or to the date of he rlnel oonviotlon In the appellete **court.**

&tlolt~ **8243, Code**  **or Crlntlnal**  **Procedure or**  Texa8, roes, **prmldee:**

## Hon.8ertFord, i’age 3

‘*The erraot of an appeal 1s to auepena and arroat all 

### further promboding la 

### tha oaae in the oourt la whloh the oonvlotion uat~had, until the jud@nont ot the appellate court la reoelved b the oourt iron whloh the 

### l ppeel waataken. fII notloe of appeal ha aaaea where, arter boon gltea, tba reoord or any portion theroot la loat or destroyed, it say be aubr:tltutad in the lwtar oourt, if aald oourt be then in reoalon; and, when 80 aubctltuted, the trmaorlpt may be greparetl andrant up aa in other oaaea. In or188the oourt from whloh the appeal wua tdcea be not then in eeaalon, the eppellato ocurt ahall postpone the canalderatlon or suoh appeal until the next tam. of aald court iroE whloh said appeal was taken; andthe sold record shall be substituted at said tar% as in other 08868.n 

### Umltrauoh atatut6, the dofondant, posataal~ the rl#ti to have hi8 appeal passe@ uponby 

### theaprellute QC)UZ%, aaaaot be ccadeto autter anyot the punlahmat aaaoesed bythe trial court until auohtlrne as the ap,,pellate oourt has aated. 3 ?srto ?raudenbur~, 140 3W780.

Artl.ele 4329 of the Revlned 3tatuteo vf !'1880uri, provldln~ that, if ti.e charge againat an attorney allege a oonvlotloa for un indictable oiianaa, tha oourt shall, onthe produotlon of the record of comlotim, rewove hk, or auapend his trm praotlae without further trial, does not authorize his auuptaaion pending e rlotio5. State of rel larew 98. Eel8 P peel tramthe aonSup. Ct. **0r** ?ro.), 87 su 967.

**?he aourt,**  Lnthe oaee of Feo:le vs. Trendwell, 6 Pac. 686, **15** holdin that ~aantlotionW aa uued In a **statute** providing for dlabemont of an attorney Eeent a Vlnal oontiotlonn andthat a diabemant aotion brought while the qontlotlon was on appeal aald:

*Xt has 

### beenfrequently held by thla oourt 

### that anappeal rraa a Judgment **0r** the iormir dlatrlot aourt tc tba aupre60 aourt operated aa a sua~tn8lon cif the judgment of the lcmfer aourt

### 4

Hon.Bert irord, Pii@ 4

for all purposes, Ihnowles v. Inches, 12 Cal. 2W; VoodburyY. Hmmn, 13 Cal, 635; People v.frlsbla, Et3

Cal.X35,) and by parityof reasoning we nust hold that tm appeal from the judgmnt of ajustice’s oourt to the superioroourt haathe sameoprratlon andeffoot. There la, thererore, nojudlJnent or the justloe*e court which Is nowcapable of being oarrled Into effeot; end It ia quite within the range ot possibilities that the judeent entered against the doiendant and nav etcmdlna onthe justloo ’s docket maybe reversed in the hlp,hwroourt. Tn our opinion, there Is not such a final oonvlotlon aaalnst the defendant as the law oontemplates to justify his raeoval; and wethink the proceeding to that end has bean prem&urely oamenoed.” Thesuprem Court of %lifornfn in the case of In ReRlcoardl, 189Pac. tW4, in considering the stetuto involved in the ease next hereinabove cited said:

“In the prooeedlna for dlsbement based uponthe record of ocnvlotlm, the judgmnt which must be pronounced Is one or absolute andfinal dlsbermmt. This dlsbernent 1s net an flnoidantl or the conviction of felony or ~lrdeneanor In the sons8 that such oonvlotlcn 1~80taoto remvos the attorney iron his offloe, or is a partof the penalty presorlbed by the law for the oifense oi which he warn ocntlotrd. It Is a separate and lndo endant thlne; (mmI’oPannayv. Horton, aupra7, end 1s not In th,eslightest d8greo **affectod** by **4** aettlng aside or reversal o,Cthe judm.ent of oc~nvlotlon of felony cr ~lodsramnor. so that unless a aonvlotion t&t has beoom final was meant, notwlthstanding that the judq.mant 1s reversed on appeal for substsntlal reasona, as, for lmtanoe, that evidence of guilt of an9offenme is absolutely wantlnrj, or that the deiendnnt has not been accordrd a fair trialHon. IIrt Ford, Page 5

on the **nerltr** In the **lrmrr** oouft, the jud@ mat of dlsbenent **baaed**solely on the reoord 0r aonvlotlo:~ et111 relhin8, andthe attorney oan be restored to hlr orfloe a8 an attorney end ooua84llor only %n the 8V6nt #at tlm court that ha8disbarred him 8448 flt to. grant **hi8** applloatlon r0r restoration: emethine **it** 18aertalnly not owpelled to do rolelg beoaure of thr. reversal **or** setting &old4 of the judgmmt of oonvlotlon. nail1 not do, In reply to th18, to 8ay thnt thie oourt would have the poroerto reatore and au.=htto raetbre In such a cam, iz It cannot be aaepplled to restore. Unleae the attoonsy her the absolute enforoeuble ruht to ba restored a.8a oono4quenoa Oftha setting aelde **or** reveres1 of the judgment of oonvlotIon-- In ether wordr, **unlesr** the restoration **ip80** raato rollons the eettfq aelde or revcreal of the judgnmnt of oonvlotlon--he Is dependent on the areroI~e In hle favor or the discretion of this oourt, whloh my or my not be In hi8 favor cs he Is loaked uponas 4 flt or unfit person to prectloe lsw, entirely regardless of the netter cf the oonvlotion. Nor will It do to MI that the rule that where a judquent is based on a previous judgarent, end the previous Judgmnt lo ZWverwd or set aside, the 84coDdjudfflGentmet be set aside, applIe8 here. If the tern 'convlotlon* aeane, not the final judgment oi Conf vlotlon, but simply the rendltlon at a rcrdlot of guilty cr a plea of guilty, a8 la the whole oontentlon of thore whblns18t that People v. ?reedwll, aupra, wanwrongly deolded, the ettarney I8 disbarred solely beoause Ofthe rendition of the verdlot or the plea of aullty, andthose icats, vi%., euoh rend1tlon of verdict or plea, remain andconstitute the bas18 of disbanxmt, whatever be the ultimate reault In the oaee. There **84458** to UBto be noanmar to the proporltlon that the Judgmentof tlnsl dirbarnont would mntinus in **foree,** notwlth**8tandim** the 8rttin& arid4 or reVerBa of th4 judment propounded on the oonviotlon of felony or mledenean0r. It la unreasonable to assume that the Legislature Intended to provide for

### 4:

**Hon. Beti**  **??omY, 1** **’ 664**  **6**

obtelnIaS thlo

l beolute andfinal dlabarmeat of en attorney **tbur** pena4wntl~ deprlring himof 4vaiueble **property** right, solely upon 4 oonrlotion that ie not final, endrhloh In dua OOure4 Ofrevi4w 18 ruberquetily deolerwl Invalid, In tha abosooe of **80me provi8ion**  ror **reetoration** 48ruetter **0r** oourse **upon** the eonrlotlon 

### belnusot a8ide. The8tatute Mces Wm reoord of oonviatlan’ the basis of tllabernent end oonclusl~4 evl-. donor thereon. The84 worde in this OOnneOtion Imply eomthln% other then the mre ve~4Iot of a jury, which maybe raeated eithar by the trial ocurt or en appeal, a4 entirely without support Lnthe evldenoe. Under our settled praotloe ot manyyears, they arc oonsldered a8 referring to the Judemoot pronounocd by the trial oourt Upton a mnvlotlon, end llkewlee, underou- doclelone, tho etetute 14eboepted a8 oontcPepleting a judment that he4beoone flnr~l....~

**The 5upens**  Court of Florida, In tha cnee or In 2.4Advisory CpLnionto the Governor, **78** So. 013, eaid:

":%ile an offioer my be **8u8pndOd** rroE orrice 'rOr the cormlesion of any felony' the offlae Is not 'deemed v40antq under teotlon **290 of**  ta:a General **Statute@,** esoept upon 'eontlctlon f, anda convlotlon la not oparatlve **~h114 n**  **8~p0r84d4a8 ii3**  dr40tir4.~ Althou@ mob authority oen be Toundto the contrary we bclleve the euthoritlee herein elted hepresent the great welEht OSauthority In the Onltad States. In view OS8uahholdinqs,.ws are o? the opinion that “eonrioted of a telonyn a8 used In the etatute here uhdor oonslderetlon mean8 a fin41 oonrietlon. Harinq 40oonoluded, It neoaeaerlly rolluws thet the 1lorn8ee Ihvolvsd herein was oouvlatad a4 of the date of the lasurnce of the mandate by the Crux-to? Crlmlnel a::peel8.

m9next 

### turnour attention to the question 0r **the** rlcht of the &mrtI-to oanoel the llosnse of lio4n844.

Artiolo 6670&9of the Penal Codeprovides thatHon. Bert Ford, Pap3 7

the Board ahall hare power and authority to canoe1 the lloenso o? auy ,person authorized **to** ml1 beer (aftor notloo and hearing) for the various roa6oIw therein aot out. Oneor the In rubdIrIsIon (g7rounds for OanosllatIon, as set forth thereof, I8 the caklnu of any falsr
**or untrue**  **rtateaent** in hi8 applioation. ‘&Ioonolude that tha Jlosneaa war ooavloted within two **year8** next precedIng,the makIng Of ruoh applfoatfon, 43iVilMri8* tC th@ rluht or rorreltum of her lloense.