This is the issue: A city police officer pulls a Defendant over for running a red light and then determines he is intoxicated. However that city police officer is outside of his jurisdiction when the arrest is made. (i.e. not in the city that he works for).

The Kurtz case (152sw3d72) says that the police officer does not have jurisdiction b/c 14.03 of the CCP does not authorize such arrests. Then 14.03(g)(1) was amended and I have read somewhere that this amendment changes Kurtz to allow such arrests.

Can anyone explain to me how the amending of 14.03(g) does this? Thanks in advance.

For offenses committed on or after September 1, 2005, a municipal police officer or marshal may make an arrest for a traffic offense that occurs anywhere in the county in which that city is located.

In Kurtz, the case was reversed b/c a Plano officer made an arrest for DWI following a stop for a traffic violation that occurred in the city of Frisco (the cities' boundary ran down the median of Hwy 121, a divided highway; the officer was on the Plano side and the driver was on the Frisco side when the Plano officer saw the Frisco violation).

Since both of those cities are in Collin County, under new 14.03(g), the Plano officer can now legally make that stop described in Kurtz. In fact, the opinion notes that Plano also extends into Denton County, so Plano PD officers can make traffic stops for offenses occurring anywhere in Collin or Denton County as long as the officer sees it taking place.

Does that help?

One of the great legislative changes last session. Thanks to all who assisted in engineering the result. Reminds me of the important change in confession law required after Davidson.

Got it, 14.03(g)(2) is as clear as daylight, I was solely focusing on 14.03(g)(1). It's good to see the forest from the trees. Thanks for your help!