Palmer v. Texas Dept. of Public Safety

• Decision Date: 20 December 1963
• Docket Number: No. 16472,16472
• Citation: 374 S.W.2d 347
• Parties: Donald Keith PALMER, Appellant, v. TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY, Appellee.
• Court: Texas Court of Appeals

Page 347

374 S.W.2d 347

Donald Keith PALMER, Appellant, v. TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY, Appellee.

No. 16472.

Court of Civil Appeals of Texas, Fort Worth.

Dec. 20, 1963.

Rehearing Denied Jan. 17, 1964.

Mike E. Powell, Fort Worth, for appellant.

Doug Crouch, Criminal Dist. Atty., and George McManus, Asst. Dist. Atty., Fort Worth, for appellee.

MASSEY, Chief Justice.

This is a case having similarity to that of Texas Department of Public Safety v. Williams, 1962 (Tex.Civ.App., Eastland), 356 S.W.2d 848, where a motorist's driver license was sought to be suspended as an habitual traffic violator under provisions of Vernon's Ann.Civ.St. Art. 6687b, 'Drivers', chauffeurs', and commercial operators' licenses; accident reports', Sec. 22, 'Authority of Department to suspend or revoke a license'. In that case, however, the trial court judgment was for the motorist. In the case before us a summary judgment was entered for the Department, the motorist's privilege to drive being suspended for a period of six (6) months.

In the Williams case, aforementioned, counsel for the motorist prevailed upon the trial court to decide that the Department of Public Safety had failed to establish the number of 'convictions' requisite to be shown by the Department in order to establish that the motorist was an 'habitual violator' of the traffic law of the State of Texas, within the provisions of subsection (b) of Sec. 22 under Art. 6687b. The trial court so held by reason of its having found that the evidence adduced before it failed to show that the motorist, whose license was sought to be suspended, had been 'convicted' within the contemplation of Texas' Code of Criminal Procedure in that there had been no plea of guilty in accordance therewith, or in particular within the contemplation of Vernon's Ann.C.C.P. Art. 518, 'Plea of guilty in misdemeanor'.

Specifically, the motorist in the Williams case had ascertained the amount his fine would be if he plead 'guility' to each of the traffic violations with which he was charged, and promptly mailed checks in the amounts of the fines, thus by-passing any procedure of pleading, depositiong bail or collateral, etc. The Court of Civil Appeals at Eastland upheld the trial court on the appeal taken by the Department. Mooneyhan v. Benedict, 1955 (Tex.Civ.App., Austin), 284 S.W.2d 741, writ ref., n. r. e., was cited as authority for the court's action in the Williams case. That case held that similar procedure did not constitute a legal plea of guilty to traffic violation and that evidence thereof was inadmissible to establish that the motorist had confessed his guilt of the traffic offense with which he was charged and because...