License was revoked 3 years ago, am I eligible to get chl back??

[jws]

In June 2012 I was arrested on a family violence charge class A
In September 2012 I plead NOLO to disorderly conduct using vulgar language, paid a fine if 100.00.
I Received a letter from DPS that ccl would be revoked for I believe three years.
The reason for this is I have never had a problem purchasing a firearm before having ccl.
During the time I had ccl, the process was easier.
In November 2014 I went to Academy sports in McKinney Texas and tried to purchase a 22 rifle and was given a delayed status.
I continued checking back with the store on the status after thirty days the status was still delayed status.

Question am I eligible to reapply to regain my CCL
I have the paperwork from the court showing the reduced charge, the conviction is Disorderly using vulgar language.
The way this is reported to DPS online shows different , the clerk office did make a change to the status but if you read it says pleas assault family violence pled to class C misdemeanor.
This is very frustrating and would like some possible avenues I could check into to find some answers,
Thanks

[casp625]

Sec. 411.172. ELIGIBILITY. (a) A person is eligible for a license to carry a concealed handgun if the person:
8) has not, in the five years preceding the date of application, been convicted of a Class A or Class B misdemeanor or equivalent offense or of an offense under Section 42.01, Penal Code, or equivalent offense;

Sec. 42.01. DISORDERLY CONDUCT. (a) A person commits an offense if he intentionally or knowingly:
(1) uses abusive, indecent, profane, or vulgar language in a public place, and the language by its very utterance tends to incite an immediate breach of the peace;

Sec. 411.186. REVOCATION. (a) The department shall revoke a license under this section if the license holder:
(c) A license holder whose license is revoked for a reason listed in Subsections (a)(1)-(5) may reapply as a new applicant for the issuance of a license under this subchapter after the second anniversary of the date of the revocation if the cause for revocation does not exist on the date of the second anniversary. If the cause for revocation exists on the date of the second anniversary after the date of revocation, the license holder may not apply for a new license until the cause for revocation no longer exists and has not existed for a period of two years.

Sounds to me like, 5 years wait for offense listed under 42.01 plus an additional 2 years for 411.186(c) for a total of 7 years. However, my understanding is if you would have surrendered your license instead of waiting for it to be revoked, it would have only been a total of 5 years.

[jws]

Once I received a letter from DPS , I sent the CHL promptly to them

[jws]

Also there is nothing that states I'm not eligible to purchase a firearm,
If I try and get purchase one it gives a delay status, I'm about to give up on trying as the way the sentenance is worded it still shows like a family violence assault with wording at end pled o misdemeanor class C

[The Annoyed Man]

Jws, please don't take this the wrong way because I have no idea of the circumstances surrounding your arrest, and I absolutely am NOT judging you..... But your experience struck me as a strong object lesson for us CHLs about never losing control over our tempers, no matter how frustrating the circumstances. Anger can be a legitimate emotion, but giving vent to it can land us in trouble, which may not be fair, but it is what it is.

Good luck with your predicament.

[Beiruty]

Why non-violent disorderly conduct is cause to loose your CHL for 5 yrs?!
42.01 is unconstitutional under the 1stA. Since the "feel of peace" of the audience is not a cause to sensor the actor.

[sjfcontrol]

Why non-violent disorderly conduct is cause to loose your CHL for 5 yrs?!
42.01 is unconstitutional under the 1stA. Since the "feel of peace" of the audience is not a cause to sensor the actor.

As TAM said, it is what it is.

It is believed that 42.01 is actionable as a class C because there are a couple of firearms-related clauses in that code section.

[WildBill]

Why non-violent disorderly conduct is cause to loose your CHL for 5 yrs?!
42.01 is unconstitutional under the 1stA. Since the "feel of peace" of the audience is not a cause to sensor the actor.

As TAM said, it is what it is.

It is believed that 42.01 is actionable as a class C because there are a couple of firearms-related clauses in that code section.

I also have a problem with the broad scope of this law.
I believe that it is a catch-all of left-over offenses.
I am hoping that this is on the agenda to change it.

[jws]

Thank you for your replies,
So a question and scenario , let say you are driving down the road with your tunes blaring and you are stopped for loud and unreasonable noise and receive a citation, you plea NOLO and pay a fine, under 42.01 , your CHL would also be revoked.
Under my circumstances if I would have taken a plea for class C assault and paid a fine I could have kept my CHL
I'm the one that stated I would not take an assault and suggested the disorderly. The DA wanted this action cleared off his docket rather quickly and even said w want this to go away.

The circumstances was I was in law enforcement, have over 20 years in, I walked into my house and two grown siblings were physically fighting and I separated them and got the one causing the trouble out the door and the problem was stopped.

[sjfcontrol]

Thank you for your replies,
So a question and scenario , let say you are driving down the road with your tunes blaring and you are stopped for loud and unreasonable noise and receive a citation, you plea NOLO and pay a fine, under 42.01 , your CHL would also be revoked.
Under my circumstances if I would have taken a plea for class C assault and paid a fine I could have kept my CHL
I'm the one that stated I would not take an assault and suggested the disorderly. The DA wanted this action cleared off his docket rather quickly and even said w want this to go away.

The circumstances was I was in law enforcement, have over 20 years in, I walked into my house and two grown siblings were physically fighting and I separated them and got the one causing the trouble out the door and the problem was stopped.

My suggestion is to talk to a lawyer -- preferably one familiar with Texas gun laws, regarding to getting the offense expunged, etc.

[jws]

Thank you

[baldeagle]

Why non-violent disorderly conduct is cause to loose your CHL for 5 yrs?!
42.01 is unconstitutional under the 1stA. Since the "feel of peace" of the audience is not a cause to sensor the actor.

I found a Texas Attorney General Opinion that explains it - https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/op ... jm0900.htm

Basically the speech used must be commonly understood to be inciting someone to fight.

The test is what men of common intelligence would understand would be words likely to cause an average addressee to fight.... Derisive and annoying words can be taken as coming within the purview of the statute ... only when they have this characteristic of plainly tending to excite the addressee to a breach of the peace.

See Gooding v. Wilson, supra, at 522, quoting with approval the Supreme Court of New Hampshire, 18 A.2d 754, 758, 762 (1941). See generally, Cohen v. California, 403 U.S. 15, 20 (1971); Bachellar v. Maryland, 397 U.S. 564, 567 (1970); and Gooding, supra. The "line between speech unconditionally guaranteed and speech which may legitimately be regulated, suppressed, or punished is finely drawn," Speiser v. Randall, 357 U.S. 513, 525 (1958).

Speech punishable under the Penal Code provision does not include language merely harsh and insulting, see Gooding, supra at 525, and it should not include speech, actual or symbolic, that is only "inappropriate," "naughty," "disgusting," "repulsive," "tactless," "gross," or "appalling." Annot., 2 A.L.R.4th 1331. Conviction under a statute specifying a "breach of the peace" as an element of the offense must be based on jury instructions including an admonition that proof of "actual or threatened violence is essential." Woods v. State, 213 S.W.2d 685, 687 (Tex.Crim.App.1948). In other words, anything short of the use of "fighting words" does not constitute a breach of the statute. See Jimmerson v. State, 561 S.W.2d 5 (Tex.Crim.App.1978). Speech is protected against punishment unless "shown likely to produce a clear and present danger of a serious substantive evil that rises far above public inconvenience, annoyance, or unrest." Terminello v. Chicago, 337 U.S. 1, 4 (1949).

So your question mischaracterizes what the statute is designed to punish. It's not merely non-violent conduct but conduct likely to incite violence.

[ScottDLS]

To the OP:

It looks like the 42.01 conviction is an at least 5 year bar to CHL, and maybe 2 more if they claim they had to revoke it. At least you very intelligently avoided the Msidemeanor Domestic Violence, which would have been a lifetime bar to firearm possession (idiotic as it may seem). Since you pled NOLO, you were effectively "convicted" of the 42.01. I think the best bet is to see if you can get it "expunged" or "set-aside/sealed", as that would then not count as a conviction under CHL. As for the NICS checks being delayed, I think there is a mechanism to file with FBI to update your record, assuming you are ultimately found eligible federally, which it seems there is no reason you should not be. But until you can get the disorderly cleared looks like at least two more years and maybe 4 to get a Texas CHL. You could get a FL or AZ to carry, but that wouldn't help you buy. Or if you're retired LEO you may already be able to carry under LEOSA.

[jws]

Thank you all for the information, the letter I received from DPS does say 3 years, upon receipt of the letter that requested I send the CHL back.
I immediately sent CHL back
I'm just looking at other avenues

Thank
Jws

[RoyGBiv]

Anything related to family violence can be permanently disqualifying.
You should consult with an attorney