Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> <br />~ <br />~ <br />~ <br /> <br />87. <br /> <br /> <br />-- <br /> <br />~-.. <br /> <br />ORDINANCE 2000- 6 <br /> <br />AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF <br />SAN MARCOS, TEXAS, ADDING NEW SECTION 1.018 TO THE <br />CITY CODE TO SPECIFY CULPABLE MENTAL STATES FOR <br />VIOLATIONS OF THE CITY CODE; ADDING A NEW SECTION <br />82.008 TO THE CITY CODE TO DISPENSE WITH THE NEED <br />FOR A CULPABLE MENTAL STATE FOR VIOLATIONS OF <br />CHAPTER 82, TRAFFIC AND VEHICLES, OF THE CITY CODE; <br />INCLUDING PROCEDURAL PROVISIONS; AND PROVIDING <br />FOR PENALTIES. <br /> <br />RECITALS: <br /> <br />1. A recent state court decision, Aguirre v. State, 1999 W.L. 767794 (Tex. Crim. App. 1999), has <br />clarified the law regarding culpable mental states for city ordinance violations. State law (TEX. <br />PENAL CODE ANN. S6.02 (West Supp. 2000)) requires that to be convicted of a crime, it must be <br />shown that a person committed the crime either intentionally, knowingly, recklessly or with criminal <br />negligence. Since Honeycutt v. State, 627 S.W.2d 417 (Tex. Crim. App. 1982), an allegation that <br />a person acted with one of these four culpable mental states has been needed in the formal complaint <br />filed against the person for violation of an ordinance. The Aguirre decision held that the ordinance <br />itself must contain a culpable mental state in order to sustain a conviction. <br /> <br />2. The adoption of the attached amendment to Chapter 1 of the City Code, to create a general <br />requirement that a violation of an ordinance be committed with one of the four culpable mental <br />states, would meet the test of the recent court decision. <br /> <br />3. Because state law dispenses with the need for a culpable mental state in connection with most <br />traffic law violations, a provision to this effect is included in the attached amendment with respect <br />to City Code Chapter 82, Traffic and Vehicles. <br /> <br />BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN MARCOS, TEXAS: <br /> <br />SECTION 1. Chapter 1, General Provisions, of the City Code is amended by adding a new Section <br />1.018 to read as follows (underlining indicates added text): <br /> <br />Sec. 1.018. Culpable mental states for ordinance violations. <br /> <br />(a) If the definition of a violation of this code does not prescribe a culpable mental state. a <br />culpable mental state is nevertheless required unless the definition plainly dispenses with the <br />need for a culpable mental state. <br /> <br />(b) If the definition of a violation of this code does not prescribe a culpable mental state. and <br />does not plainly dispense with the need for a culpable mental state. then intent knowledge or <br />recklessness suffices to establish criminal responsibility for the violation. <br /> <br />(c) Culpable mental states are defined in V.T.C.A.. Penal Code Sec. 6.03. as amended. <br /> <br />SECTION 2. Chapter 82, Traffic and Vehicles, of the City Code is amended by adding a <br />new Section 82.009 to read as follows (underlining indicates added text): <br /> <br />Section 82.009. Culpable mental state not required for violations. <br /> <br />No culpable mental state is needed with respect to a violation of any provision of this chapter. <br />The intent ofthis section is to plainly dispense with the requirement for a culpable mental state <br />as described in Section 1.018 of this code and V.T.C.A. Penal Code Sec. 6.02. as amended. <br /> <br />SECTION 3. If any word, phrase, clause, sentence, or paragraph of this ordinance is held <br />to be unconstitutional or invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, the other provisions of this <br /> <br />1 <br />