TexasCHLforum.com

flintknapper wrote:After reading the PDF Chas. provided (thanks) I am left wondering: Did this guy have a lawyer?

This still “irks” me:

I just reread the decision and it seems that the original trial was a bench trial, so Gabriel Thomas didn't have a jury. Maybe the court didn't want to overturn "fact-finding" of the judge.

I think Gabriel Thomas was a minor. Stella Saxon is a Juvenile Judge. Do juveniles have a right to a jury trial?

After reading more closely I see. I took "lever on the side" to mean on the handle, but then he says it's on the blade. It's also interesting that the testimony about how this makes the knife "dangerous".

Here's another link to the court decision
http://www.precydent.com/citation/TX+App+(4th" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;)/04-06-00864-CR

The link doesn't work, but you can get to it if you Google: "Gabriel Thomas" switchblade

IANAL, but the way I read the decision the knive really was a switchblade, and not merely "assisted opening". Ortiz testified "it has a spring and that springs it into action." The court concluded that the knife in quesiton was "spring-loaded and therefore a prohibited weapon." It also talks about opening and locking a "with a button or lever". The appellant Thompson was the only one claiming that the knive had a "gravity torsion bar", but his testimony was rejected. It would be nice to know what brand and model of knive was involved. What am I missing?

Mike1951 wrote:It also didn't help that the defendant couldn't get his story straight.

"Honest, I didn't have a knife on me, and if I did it wasn't a switchblade, and if it was a switchblade I didn't know it was."

lunchbox wrote:i bet what happened is someone was caught and arrested with an assisted open knife and word got around that it was illegal cuz some liberal cop felt that it should be and thats the way he enforces it and if you dont know any better one will just go to jail without a word if in fact this is what happened we need a slick lawyer to take this case and put these cops behind a desk i thought LEO were educated on what the law is and expected to enforce it as such but it would seem to me they do what they want

I doubt that happened.

What decision are you referring to?