Texas Attorney General Opinion: M-612 Page: 4 of 7
7 p.View a full description of this text.
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
Hon. F. A. Cerda, page 4 (M-612)
Under the provisions of Section 65 of Article XVI of
the Texas Constitution this is an election year for the office
of Justice of the Peace but isnot an election year for the office
of Constable. The offices of constable and Justice of the Peace
in each of the new precincts came into being vacant as of March
9, 1970, and said vacancies were to be filled by the Commissioners
Court until the next General Election. Attorney General Opinions
WW-536 (1958) and V-1032 (1950).
The order of March 9th changed the boundaries but did
not change the numbers of the Justice precincts, there being
at all times four justice precincts as required by the Con-
stitution. Under the provisions of Section 65 of Article XVI
of the Texas Constitution this is an election year for all
Justices of the Peace in single justice precincts. All such
offices are to be filled for a four year term. This holds
true for newly created as well as previously existing offices
of justice of the peace. The candidates filed for the office
of justice of the peace by the proper precinct number. The
changing of the boundaries could have affected their residence
requirements but did not do so under the facts set out in
your letter. The changing of the precinct numbers could have
affected the identification of the particular office for which
a candidate sought to run but did not do so under the facts
presented. You also stated that all candidates for justice of
the peace filed with the intention to run for their respective
positions within the newly created precincts which at the time
they filed they thought corresponded to the new County Commis-
sioners precincts. The order of March the 9th recites that the
justice precincts shall correspond to the commissioners precincts.
We have found no provision of the Election Code which would extend
the deadline for filing for justice of the peace or would require
that such candidates to amend their applications, withdraw them,
or refile their applications for the office under the facts
presented. Therefore, based upon the facts presented, we have
concluded that the candidates who filed for the offices of justice
of the peace by the February 2nd deadline are legally on the
ballot for the May 2nd primary election.
The controlling legal question is whether a candidate's
application filed in accordance with the Election Code but prior
to the change of boundaries of the justice precincts by the order
of the Commissioners' Court must be treated as a nullity. The
intention of the candidate to run for the described office is clear
under Article 13.12 of the Election Code. If the candidate desired-29 25-
,' ~ -8,
Upcoming Pages
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
This text can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Text.
Texas. Attorney-General's Office. Texas Attorney General Opinion: M-612, text, April 22, 1970; (https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth269837/m1/4/: accessed July 17, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, https://texashistory.unt.edu.; crediting UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.