Amicus Briefs would be greatly welcome for this PDR.
In 1992, Defendant's License expired. A few months later, his license was suspended. Few years later, he's arrested in SA for DWLI, is convicted, appeals, and the 4th court (noted some interesting comments on that court in that this is my first foray into this forum) reversed on the grounds that you cannot suspend an expired license. Skipping the hilarious details, Defendant now has two convictions out of Guadalupe County, both of which were for offenses occurring after modifications to the DWLI statutes. Most important change is that the Definition of "License" includes the privilege to drive whether or not the person actually has a license.
Defendant appealed both convictions and the 4th Court, ignoring all the new statutory language, just repeats what they said years back: You can't suspend an expired license.
With these decisions (both unpublished memo opinions), what self-respecting deadbeat will bother having a license? Just let it expire or surrender same. You'll never worry about a suspension again or anything worse than a Class "C".
The first case currently sitting with the Court of Criminal Appeals bears cause number PD-1570-05. The second one hasn't gotten there yet (4th COA cause number 04-05-00011-CR).
Any cheerleading help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks.

You will want to utilize the prior discussion of this topic. License

I wonder what the San Antonio court thought about the Court of Criminal Appeals' opinion in Hernandez v State, 842 S.W.2d 294 (1992) in which the court held that "[a]s there is no longer a requirement that a defendant have a valid driver's license before the Department of Public Safety can suspend driving privileges, it is no longer required that the defendant demonstrate that he has a valid driver's license before he can ask the jury to recommend that his license not be suspended." When I "shepardized" the case, it didn't show the Arteaga opinions.

Janette Ansolabehere
DPS Office of General Counsel