I think it more a stepping stone toward BALANCE, the CHRIST mind is balanced. both the DRIVER LICENCE & DRIVER,S LICENCE are for commercial lean In fairness DRIVER LICENCE period if you hold one it means your competent to hold it what else is the test for but a LICENCE profession of transport.The term sunday DRIVER never took a test is simply they DOT never had one if the salesman told u ones the gas pedal ones the brake and u go no place without clutch.My point being sunday had no commercial traffic all professional Driver,s new what a sunday driver was.It was that Monday through sunday driver that slowed the commercial transportation down yes with SUNDAY COMPETENCY issues that's still up for grabs a commercial COMPETENCY or a commercial liability how can u balance behavior commercially u make it a PRIVILEGE to share the roadways with professionals when Bonnie with Clyde lost more than any rights & PRIVILEGE Identified as public enemies did Bonnie or Clyde ever drive nope it was traveling back then only a licensed commercial DRIVER could DRIVE. I am saying if a privilege is based on compliance what compliance does the Driver lose with a suspension he ends his profession commercially I cant lose my competency as a Driver when i,am not a Driver so DRIVER,s are any one who DRIVES just never commercially. A Suspended Driver,s Licence that,s fine/ insurance is on the Automobile not its Driver How many Driver,s are insured none I thank u David Merrill for finding ones balance is a journey it helps to know the ones that never worry as nowadays every balance works with a net


2. Automobiles Key 352

Proof that defendant had driven an automobile while his driver's license was suspended did not sustain allegations of charge that he had driven while his operator's license was suspended.? Hey, at six a.m. this morning, you know the man knocked at my door
I screamed into his ear, "Now looka here, I'm not the guy you're searching for"
But I got taken, yeah I got taken just the same
When it comes to getting sleep at night
You know I just can't seem to win

I went down to the zoo where I thought that I might hide
I met a friendly grizzly bear, who took me for a ride
And I got mangled, yeah I got pushed all out of shape
Yes, when it comes to being sociable
I just can't seem to win

Climbing up Mt. Everest to get away from all the noise
I slipped on a banana peel man and I almost got destroyed
And I was, I was worried, oh yes, I was worried all the way down to the ground
When it comes to holding safety nets
Nobody ever seems to be around

Well I put myself together, you know I found that it was best
If I had no longer tried to be just like all the rest
Because I'm, I'm twisted, yeees and I dig the way I am
Don't ask me about being normal you know I, I just no longer give a damn ?? Steppenwolf Twisted TRUTH and What shape it comes in? Riding with Christ [being ]non Commercial thief


3. Automobiles Key 136

There is in Texas no such license as a "driver's license."

---- ----

No attorney on appeal for appellant.

Wesley Dice, State's Atty., Austin, for the State.

BELCHER, Commissioner.

Appellant was convicted, in the County Court Panola County, for unlawfully operating- a motor vehicle upon a public highway while his operator's license was suspended, and his punishment was assessed at a fine of $25.

[1]Under such a charge, the state wasunder the burden of showing that there had been issued an operator's license to appellant to drive a motor vehicle upon a public highway;that such license had been suspended;and that,whilesuchlicensewas atsuspended, appellant drove a motor vehicle upon a public highway.

To meet this requirement, the state here relies upon testimony that appellant drove his pick-up truck upon a public highway in Panola County, on the date alleged, and that he drove said motor vehicle while his license was suspended

Page – Tex. 402

[2, 3]"This proof is insufficient to 'sustain the allegations of the offense charged in the information because a driver's license is not an operator's license.We have held that there is no such license as a driver's license known to our law.Hassell v. State, 149 Tex.Cr.R. 333, 194 S.W.2d 400; Holloway v. State, 155 Tex.Cr.R. 484, 237 S.W. 2d 303; and Brooks v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 258 S.W.2d 317.

Proof of the driving of an automobile while the driver's license was suspended does not sustain the allegations of the information.The evidence being insufficient to support the conviction, the judgment is reversed and the cause remanded.

Opinion approved by the Court.

Page - 360 Tex.

Frank John CALLAS, Appellant,
v.
STATE of Texas, Appellee.

No. 30094.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Jan. 7.1959.

Prosecution for driving motor vehicle on public road after operator's license had been suspended. The County Court at Law, Potter County, Mary Lou Robinson, J., entered judgment of conviction and defendant appealed.The Court of Criminal Appeals, Woodley, J., held that where testimony showed that only two persons were in or around truck at time defendant was apprehended and patrolman testified that the other person was not the driver of truck, andlargely upon this testimony jury found defendant guilty, and after jury retired police officer filed complaint charging other person with driving motor vehicle with violation of restrictions imposed on his operator's license and such other person was convicted upon his plea of guilty, defendant's motion for new trial setting forth conviction of such other person should have been granted in order that defendant might have the benefit of evidence regarding conviction of other party in another trial.

Reversed and remanded.

Criminal Law Key 938(1)

In prosecution for driving after operator's license had been suspended where testimony showed that there were only two persons including defendant in or around truck at time patrolman reached it and patrolman testified that other person was not driving panel truck, and after jury retired patrolman filed complaint charging other party with driving motor vehicle and he was convicteduponhispleaof guilty,defendant's motion for new trial should have been granted in order that he might, in another trial, have the benefit of evidence regarding conviction of other party.Vernon's Ann.Civ.St. art. 6687b, § 1(n).

---- ----

McCarthy, Rose & Haynes, Amarillo,for appellant.

Lon Moser, County Atty., E. S. Carter, Jr., Asst. County Atty., Amarillo, State’s Atty., Austin, for the State.

WOODLEY, Judge.

The complaint and information allege that appellant drove a motor vehicle upon a public road "after the Texas Operator's License of the said Frank John Callas had ***been suspended" and further alleged that appellant had received an extended period, of suspension "of said Texas Operator's License*** "and that said suspension had not expired.

We have searched the record carefully and find no evidence that the license which had been suspended was a Texas Operator's License, as alleged in the information.

If appellant was driving a motor vehicle, it was a panel truck used as a commercial vehicle in appellant's business, the appropriate license for its operation being a Commercial Operator's License, and not an Operator's License.See Art. 6687b. Sec. I (n), Vernon's Ann.Civ.St.

This Court has held that there is no such license known to Texas law as a "driver's license".See Hassell v. State, 149 Tex. Cr.R. 333, 194S.W.2d400; Brooks v. State, 158 Tex.Cr.R. 546, 258 S.W.2d 317.

There were but two persons in or around the panel truck.One was Walter Schaff, who was seated in the driver's seat when the patrolmen reached it.Patrolman Kirkwood testified that Schaff was not driving the panel truck, and largely upon his testimony the jury found that appellant was the driver.

After the jury retired, Officer Kirkwood filed complaint charging Schaff with driving [Page - Tex 361] a motor vehicle in violation of restrictions imposed in his operator's license.Information was presented by the County Attorney and Schaff was convicted upon his plea of guilty.

Appellant's motion for new trial setting forth the conviction of Schaff after the close of the evidence on appellant's trial should have been granted in order that upon another trial appellant might have the benefit of the evidence regarding the conviction of Schaff.

Appellant’s motion for rehearing is granted; our former opinion herein affirming the judgment is withdrawn, and the judgment is now reversed and the cause remanded

Page - Tex. 317

BROOKS v. STATE.

No. 26458.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

May 27, 1953

From a judgment rendered by the County Court, Culberson County, defendant appealed.The Court of Criminal Appeals, Belcher, C. held that information, charging defendant with driving a motor vehicle upon a public highway while his "driver's license" was suspended, charged no offense.

Reversed with directions.

Automobiles Key 351

Information, charging defendant with driving a motor vehicle upon a public highway while his "driver's license" was suspended, charged no offense. Vernon's Ann. Civ. St. art. 6687b, § 27. The Court and Private Name is styled with standing room only no defence table needed why defend the truth its enough to know it.