TexasCHLforum.com

Kyle Brown wrote: I do not believe that a 30.06 sign posted at the enterance of a parking lot is effective notice to prohibit a person from leaving a gun in their car on said parking lot. This statute clearly states that a "license holder" has the meaning assigned by TPC 46.035(f).

Furthermore, TPC 46.035(f)(3) Unlawful Carrying Of Handgun By License Holder defines a premise as a building or a portion of a building. The term does not include any public or private driveway, street, sidewalk or walkway, parking lot, parking garage, or other parking area.

A couple of important things here. First, the text of 46.035(f). Please pay attention to the part in bold:
(f) In this section:
(3) "Premises" means a building or a portion of a building. The term does not include any public or private driveway, street, sidewalk or walkway, parking lot, parking garage, or other parking area.

Got it? The definition of "premises" in 46.035(f)(3) only applies in this section, meaning PC 46.035.

This is important because 46.035 (Unlawful carry of a handgun by a license holder) lists the places that are off limits by statute.

They are (paraphrased):
(b) A license holder commits an offense if the license holder intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly carries a handgun:
(1) on the premises of a business that has a 51% TABC license;
(2) on the premises where a high school, collegiate, or professional sporting event or interscholastic event is taking place;
(3) on the premises of a correctional facility;
(4) on the premises of a hospital or nursing home;
(5) in an amusement park; or
(6) on the premises of a church, synagogue, or other established place of religious worship.

Those are the only places where "premises" is used in 46.035. Section 46.03 also uses the same definition. These are the only places in the entire Penal Code where the definition used in 46.035(f)(3) can be applied. It simply doesn't apply in arguments about trespassing and 30.06.

Kevin

nitrogen wrote:about verbal notification:
How effective is this really in court? I'd think that it'd be ill-advised for verbal notification to be given, as it could denegrate into a "he said/she said" battle.

Do you know of anyone actually being criminally prosecuted successfully when they were given verbal notice?

The property owner can satisfy the court that he made a verbal statement, but it's much harder to satisfy the court that someone else heard it. Just because they said it, doesn't mean you heard it.

I once had to issue a trespass notice against a young man who had been temporarily staying with us while his parents were in jail. We told him that he had to go to school as one of the conditions of staying with us. He decided no skip after we had left for work, and broke into our house. The neighbor called police, who called me, and three cops and I gave him a very stern talking to.

Then at the end, my wife and I had to tell him verbally in front of the police that he could no longer come to our house or onto our property. The police had him and us sign a "trespass warning". They told me that without such a warning, especially if verbal notice is not given in front of police, it's almost impossible to prosecute criminal trespass.

Kevin