New Opinion of DPS Attorney on CHL under 46.035

CHL discussions that do not fit into more specific topics

Moderators: carlson1, Charles L. Cotton

User avatar

Charles L. Cotton
Site Admin
Posts in topic: 4
Posts: 17787
Joined: Wed Dec 22, 2004 9:31 pm
Location: Friendswood, TX
Contact:

Re: New Opinion of DPS Attorney on CHL under 46.035

#31

Post by Charles L. Cotton »

To clear up any miscommunication or misunderstanding that might have occurred during a recent CHL Instructor class, I have received permission to post the official DPS position on the off-limit locations set forth in TPC §§46.035(b)(4)-(6) and (c).

TPC §46.035(b)(4)-(6) makes it unlawful for an armed CHL to go on the premises of a hospital, nursing home, amusement park (as defined) or church.

TPC §46.035(c) makes it unlawful for an armed CHL to go on the premises of a meeting of a governmental entity.

However, TPC §46.035(i) adds another element to the offense by stating that the above-referenced locations are off-limits only if the CHL is given effective notice as required by TPC §30.06.

Pursuant to TPC §30.06, this notice can be oral or written, but it must comply with the requirements of TPC §30.06 as to the wording of any written notice and, if a sign is used, the sign must also meet the size and location requirements of TPC §30.06. TPC §30.06(b) also requires that effective notice be given by the "owner of the property or someone with apparent authority to act for the owner . . ." TPC §30.06 is set forth in its entirety below.

This explanation should clear up any misunderstanding or ambiguity concerning locations coming within the scope of TPC §46.035(b).

Regards,
Chas.
TPC §30.06 wrote:Sec. 30.06. TRESPASS BY HOLDER OF LICENSE TO CARRY CONCEALED HANDGUN. (a) A license holder commits an offense if the license holder:
  • (1) carries a handgun under the authority of Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code, on property of another without effective consent; and

    (2) received notice that:
    • (A) entry on the property by a license holder with a concealed handgun was forbidden; or

      (B) remaining on the property with a concealed handgun was forbidden and failed to depart.
(b) For purposes of this section, a person receives notice if the owner of the property or someone with apparent authority to act for the owner provides notice to the person by oral or written communication.

(c) In this section:
  • (1) "Entry" has the meaning assigned by Section 30.05(b).

    (2) "License holder" has the meaning assigned by Section 46.035(f).

    (3) "Written communication" means:
    • (A) a card or other document on which is written language identical to the following: "Pursuant to Section 30.06, Penal Code (trespass by holder of license to carry a concealed handgun), a person licensed under Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code (concealed handgun law), may not enter this property with a concealed handgun"; or

      (B) a sign posted on the property that:
      • (i) includes the language described by Paragraph (A) in both English and Spanish;

        (ii) appears in contrasting colors with block letters at least one inch in height; and

        (iii) is displayed in a conspicuous manner clearly visible to the public.
(d) An offense under this section is a Class A misdemeanor.

(e) It is an exception to the application of this section that the property on which the license holder carries a handgun is owned or leased by a governmental entity and is not a premises or other place on which the license holder is prohibited from carrying the handgun under Section 46.03 or 46.035.
User avatar

Topic author
rtschl
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 5
Posts: 1252
Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2009 1:50 pm
Location: Fort Worth

Re: New Opinion of DPS Attorney on CHL under 46.035

#32

Post by rtschl »

Thank you Charles. And Happy Birthday to Texas CHL Forum.

Merry Christmas!

Ron
Ron
NRA Member
User avatar

TheArmedFarmer
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 3
Posts: 574
Joined: Wed Nov 05, 2008 9:18 pm
Location: Grapevine

Re: New Opinion of DPS Attorney on CHL under 46.035

#33

Post by TheArmedFarmer »

I'm glad to see this position statement from the DPS. As recently as last summer, the folks at Lock n' Load in Tyler were still teaching that hospitals, nursing homes, amusement parks and churches are all off-limits. When I tried to correct them, they disagreed and politely told me to let them be the instructor (not in those words, of course).

The NRA continues to publish this incorrect information, much to my chagrin: http://www.nraila.org/statelawpdfs/TXSL.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Life member: NRA, THSC, HSLDA.
User avatar

TheArmedFarmer
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 3
Posts: 574
Joined: Wed Nov 05, 2008 9:18 pm
Location: Grapevine

Re: New Opinion of DPS Attorney on CHL under 46.035

#34

Post by TheArmedFarmer »

Addendum: It would be helpful if that position statement was posted somewhere on http://www.txdps.state.tx.us" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Life member: NRA, THSC, HSLDA.

Jonathanaf
Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 50
Joined: Sun May 06, 2007 10:54 pm
Location: Houston

Re: New Opinion of DPS Attorney on CHL under 46.035

#35

Post by Jonathanaf »

AEA wrote:Are we gonna get an update on this from Charles or anyone else at TSRA?
Also hoping for an update. Both hospitals I have been to recently have 30.06s posted.
I love Texas
User avatar

Charles L. Cotton
Site Admin
Posts in topic: 4
Posts: 17787
Joined: Wed Dec 22, 2004 9:31 pm
Location: Friendswood, TX
Contact:

Re: New Opinion of DPS Attorney on CHL under 46.035

#36

Post by Charles L. Cotton »

TheArmedFarmer wrote:Addendum: It would be helpful if that position statement was posted somewhere on http://www.txdps.state.tx.us" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
DPS doesn't post position statements on any issues.

Chas.
User avatar

TheArmedFarmer
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 3
Posts: 574
Joined: Wed Nov 05, 2008 9:18 pm
Location: Grapevine

Re: New Opinion of DPS Attorney on CHL under 46.035

#37

Post by TheArmedFarmer »

Charles L. Cotton wrote:DPS doesn't post position statements on any issues.
A pity. At least they do address the issue in their F.A.Q. (PDF file).
Life member: NRA, THSC, HSLDA.
User avatar

Oldgringo
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 11203
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2008 10:15 pm
Location: Pineywoods of east Texas

Re: New Opinion of DPS Attorney on CHL under 46.035

#38

Post by Oldgringo »

Other than the well known and/or properly posted no-carry locations:

Don't ask, don't show, don't tell and don't pull it until the BG's are positively identified, shots have been fired and you and/or yours are in clear and present danger.

Then and only then, if your defensive reaction results in charges against you, you then have recourse to countercharges of negilgence, wrongful and criminal endangerment, entrapment, let your imaginination run as to your sources of financial recovery and legal defense.

BTW, before anyone gets 'wrapped around the axle', IANAL.
Post Reply

Return to “General Texas CHL Discussion”