Drake v. Texas Dept. of Public Safety
Decision Date | 24 June 1965 |
Docket Number | No. 14598,14598 |
Citation | 393 S.W.2d 320 |
Parties | George Kerry DRAKE, Appellant, v. TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY, Appellee. |
Court | Texas Court of Appeals |
Don Brown, La Marque, and Engelke, Brown & Holbrook, La Marque, of counsel, for appellant.
Jules Damiani, Jr., Criminal Dist. Atty. of Galveston County, and Ronald L. Wilson, Asst. Criminal Dist. Atty. of Galveston County, for appellee.
From appellee's order suspending appellant's Texas Operator's License for a period of twelve months, made after an administrative hearing in the Justice of the Peace Court, Precinct 5, Galveston County, Texas, on February 5, 1964, appellant appealed to the County Court No. 2 of Galveston County, praying that said order of suspension be set aside. That court granted a summary judgment on December 17, 1964, authorizing appellee to suspend appellant's driver's license for one year under Article 6687b, Section 23, Vernon's Annotated Texas Statutes, and denied appellant's motion for summary judgment. Appellant on appeal to this Court contends that the court's action in both respects was contrary to law.
Appellee alleged in its second amended original answer that appellant 'has committed an offense for which sutomatic suspension of license is made upon conviction under Article 6687b, Section 22B, V.A.T.S. to-wit: Driving While License Suspended in Harris County, Texas, on or about the 20th day of August, A.D. 1963.' Appellee also alleged that 'George Kerry Drake, was convicted of Driving While License Suspended in Cause Number 11,276 in County Court No. 2 of Galveston County, Texas, on the 23rd day of April, A.D. 1963, * * *.'
Appellee prayed that its action in suspending appellant's Texas Operator's License No. 0659270 and driving privileges issued to appellant be in all things confirmed as being in conformity with the law, 'and that the suspension of any and all licenses issued to Plaintiff (appellant) herein be made effective upon final judgment in this cause, * * * and that such suspension continue for such period as set forth in the order issued by the Texas Department of Public Safety on or about the 19th day of February, 1964; * * *.'
Appellee pleaded in its second motion for summary judgment, which was granted, 'C. Section 22(b) of Article 6687b, which declares:
"The authority to suspend the license of any operator, commercial operator, or chauffeur as authorized in this section is granted the Department upon determining after proper hearing as hereinbefore set out that the licensee: has committed an offense for which automatic suspension of license is made upon conviction, to-wit: Driving While License Suspended."
In answer to appellee's said motion for summary judgment, appellant pleaded in his counter-motion for summary judgment the following definition of the offense of 'Driving While License Suspended':
'Section 24(c) of Article 6687(b) of Texas Revised Civil Statutes, which reads as follows:
"The suspension of any license shall be automatically extended upon licensee being convicted of operating a motor vehicle while the license of such person is suspended; such extended period of suspension to be for a like period as the original suspension, and is in addition to any other penalty assessed, as provided in this Act."
The summary judgment from which appeal has been taken decrees: 'that Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment be granted, thereby authorizing the Defendant to suspend said Plaintiff's operator's license No. 0659270 and driving privileges for a period of time not to exceed one (1) year, as provided in Article 6687B, V.A.T.C.S., Section 23; * * *.' Section 23 of such Article merely provides that 'The Department shall not suspend a license for a period of more than one (1) year.' It does not authorize the suspension of a license for conviction of operating a motor vehicle while the license of such operator is suspended.
We find no provision in Article 6687b, Sec. 22, authorizing the suspension of a driving license because a person operates a motor vehicle while his license is suspended. Section 22(b) does grant to the Department the authority to suspend an operator's license upon determining after a proper hearing that the licensee is guilty of any one of some nine different things, including: '1 Has committed an offense for which automatic suspension of license is made upon conviction.' Article 6687b Section 24(a), which provides for automatic suspension of license, enumerates five different offenses of which a license shall be suspended upon conviction. It does not included in such enumeration the operation of a motor vehicle by one whose license has been suspended. Article 6687b, Section 24(c), hereinabove set out, however, does provide that the suspension of any license shall be automatically extended upon conviction of operating a motor vehicle while the driver's license is suspended; 'such extended period of suspension to be for a like period as the original suspension * * *.' The Department, therefore, had the authority to extend appellant's period of suspension, if such existed, for a like period after the original suspension. The trial court could not give the Department greater authority than provided in the statute.
It is necessary, therefore, to determine whether appellant's driver's license was suspended at the time he was convicted of driving while his license was suspended, and if so, the period for which it was suspended. Appellee based its second motion for summary judgment in part upon the affidavit of Jessie C. Lewis, Deputy Custodian of the Department of Public Safety, Driver & Vehicle Records Division of the State of Texas, which affidavit purports to have been made upon personal knowledge. The affiant sets out the operating record of George Kerry Drake, the holder of Texas Operator's License No. 0659270. It is a long record extending back to November 22, 1961 when there was an affirmative finding that said licensee was an habitual violator of the traffic laws. It will not be necessary in deciding this case to set out the entire record.
Appellee pleaded and the record shows that appellant was convicted on April 23, 1963 of driving on April 10, 1963 while his license was suspended, and that his license was suspended for an additional six months from August 27, 1963. This suspension would continue until February 27, 1964. The record also shows that on November 20, 1963 appellant was convicted of driving on August 20, 1963 without a valid operator's license. There is no pleading covering this offense nor is there any record of any suspension or extension of suspension by the Department covering such offense. Appellant's exceptions ot paragraphs II and IV of appellee's request for admissions referring to this offense were properly sustained. The summary judgment of the trial court was not based upon the conviction for the offense of driving without a license on August 20, 1963.
The Department's order attacked herein by appellant, made on February 19, 1964, orders the suspension of appellant's license for twelve additional months effective from February 27, 1964. Under Sec. 24(c) of Article 6687b, V.A.T.S., appellant's suspension was authorized for only an additional six months since the original suspension upon which the Department's order was based was for six months. This will extend the suspension until August 27, 1964. Appellant's petition was filed on March 3, 1964. The filing of the petition abated the suspension under Article 6687b, V.A.T.S., Section 31, from the date of such filing until final judgment herein. It is our view, therefore, that the judgment of the trial court was in error and should be modified by ordering that the suspension of appellant's license be extended for a period of six months from February 27, 1964, the effective date of suspension, and continue from date of final judgment herein, after crediting time elapsed from February 27, 1964 to March 3, 1964. Article 6687b, Section 31; Texas Department of Public Safety v. Perlman, Tex.Civ.App., 340 S.W.2d 522.
In passing on appellee's motion for summary judgment, the court had before it in evidence the pleadings and exceptions of the parties, the affidavit of Jessie C. Lewis, Deputy Custodian of the Department of Public Safety Driver & Vehicle Records Division, the motions of both appellant an...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Hidalgo v. Surety Savings and Loan Association
...Anderson v. Bormann, 489 S.W.2d 945 (Tex.Civ.App.--San Antonio 1973, writ ref'd n.r.e.); Drake v. Texas Department of Public Safety, 393 S.W.2d 320 (Tex.Civ.App.--Houston 1965, writ ref'd n.r.e.). This is particularly true in a case such as this where it became necessary to file additional ......
-
Castro v. Sebesta
...record that includes two other accidents and the traffic tickets. This Court in Drake v. Texas Department of Public Safety, 393 S.W.2d 320, 325 (Tex.App.--Houston [1st Dist.] 1965, writ ref'd n.r.e.), held that a certificate showing the operating record of a party was admissible as prima fa......
-
Lowe v. Texas Dept. of Public Safety
...(Tex.Civ.App.), no writ hist.; McPeak v. Texas Dept. of Public Safety, 346 S.W.2d 138 (Tex.Civ.App.), no writ hist.; Drake v. Texas Dept. of Public Safety, 393 S.W.2d 320 (Tex.Civ.App.), writ ref., We hold that the trial court did not err in deeming the requests for admissions admitted, nor......
-
Texas Dept. of Public Safety v. Preble
...1960, except for the fact that under Section 22, an appeal has the effect of suspending the suspension. (See also Drake v. Texas Department of Public Safety, 393 S.W.2d 320 (Tex.Civ.App.). On February 21, 1961, the Department issued a new license, the old one having expired. The Court of Ci......