OW TEXAS 

AUSTIN.TEXAS 

April 27, 1950 

Hon. H. B. McCoy, D.C;, President 

Board of Chlropraotlc Exmnlners 

Austin, Texas op-a 

Re: The 

Dear Sir1 '~ 

Ho. ,v-1047. 

ellgiblllty for a chlroprac$lc license of one 

,prevlouslg convloted of a 

.feloIly. ',~ 

33eference lb made to your recent request which 

reads In part as follows: 

"T&I B&HI has. ati.applibatlon from a 

doator who was convicted of a felony in Call- 

'fornla on August 28,.X944.. He was dlsoharged 

'April 1, lj46:: Ii&ha? resided in Texas since 

1947, ~aaca~ing %o the record w6 have. :,. 

?!here IS a questloi in our Blinds a8"ti 

whether or not',thls.doctor would be eligible 

for a Chlropraotlc Lloense'conslderlng the 

above felony convlatlon.~ The doctor meets 

all other qualiflcatlons for'-llcenslng. 

c mQuestion: Cons,lderlng the above felony 

convlatlon, but meeting other requirements, 

1s #la doctor ellglbls~for a llaense?? 

Section 14 of House~Blll 721, Aots of the 

&eglslature, B.S. 1949, Ch. 94, p. 160, .provlde? in 

as followsx 

'The Texas Board of Cliiropractlc E&l& 

era shall have the &ythorltg to Evoke, canoel, or suspend the license of any person or 

refuse to admit persons t6:its examlnatioim " 

and to issue licenses to practice chlropraotit+ to any person or persona for any of,tiae > 

following reasons: 

*4. Convlotion of a erlme of the graae 

of a felony, oil one which Involves moral turpltude, or the 'proaurlng or assisting in the 

promring of,a crlmbaal abortion; . .' .".: 

51st 

part 
. . 

Hon. M. B. McCoy, D.C., page 2 (v-1047) 

It is stated ln 3 Sutherland Statutory Construction, 92, 93, Grants of Power, Sec. 5811, that: 

'Certain principles peculiar to statu- 

,tory provlslons involving grants of power or 

authority have evolved ,for the determlnatlon 

of their man&tory or direotory character. 

Under the general rule that grants, of powers 

are strictly construed, such provisions are 

generally mandatory In the sense that the 

power granted can be exercised only in strict 

conformity with the statutory eondltlons 

therefor.' But in those fields of adminlstratlve action w4ere an exercise of discretion 

1s normally intended. as with 1loenSinn au- 

%horlty. provisions urantlnn power may b 

hela to be dlreotory only."(Buphasls a*&) 

See also~Smlth v. State Board of Meedical'Examlners, 46 

Ga. App. 356, 167 S.E. 769 (19331. 

In view .of.the foregoing it is our opinion under the facts submitted that the~statutti makes~lt discretlojmry with the Board of Chiropractic EWuLners whethee the Board vi11 accept en applioant for examination 

.who has been convlotetl of a felony. -Of course the fact 

that the applicant has beea convicted of a felony my 

also be considered by the Board in determining whether 

the applloant is a person of good moral cbaraater under 

Sectlou 10 of the above Act. 

L 

Whether the Board of Chiropraotlc E%an~- 

lners will issue or refuse to issue a license 

to a person yho haa been donvloted of a felony to praaflce chlropractlo is left by the 

Statute to the discretion of such Board. SW. 

14, H.B. 721, Acts 51st Leg., R.S. 1949, ch. 

94, p. 160; 3 Sutherlanb Statutory Constmotlon 92, 9, Grants of,Power, Sec. 5811. 

APPRCVEDx Yours very truly, 

J. C. Davis, Jr. 

County Affairs DlvlsIau 

PRICE MNIFZ 

Attorney General 

J.~R. Oreenhlll 

First Assistant 

Price Daniel 

Attorney General 

BAIbh 

mAi&tant