CHL?

[theinvisibleheart]

I got stopped by Lewisville PD on 11/02/2008 around 10:55pm.

After I got stopped and handed in my TX DL and copy of insurance card
per request, Ofc. asked me if I had a gun. I said yes and
offered to show him my CHL. The gun was inside the compartment by driver's side.

He refused, telling me that I was in violation of CHL regulation.

Was Ofc. right?

Also, Ofc. told me that he had the right to report my violation
of CHL regulation and getting my CHL revoked by licensing bureau,
depending on what they choose to do.

Can a LEO refused to examine a CHL card and report it as a violation?

Also, when I was initially stopped, I wasn't told what the reason for the stop was.

Ofc. told me the reason for the stop after he walked to the front of the p/u and noted the
expired registration. When I asked him, how he knew about the expired registration from
behind the p/u, he told me he had ran the license plate.

If so, should there be a record of license plate check of my p/u before the vehicle
stop at 10:55 p.m.? Otherwise, it's a stop w/o any PC(Probable Cause), right?

BTW, I got cited for DVD player being visible from driver's view(radio/satellite radio/dvd
combined into one), expired registration, and expired insurance(current but forgot to put in
updated copy and told Ofc. so).

--John

[glockrell]

Its my understanding & best practice to show your CHL IMMEDIATELY when asked for I.D. / Driver's License. According to your statement, you did not display you license initially but waited until you were further questioned.

I am not sure that he can report or incourage a revocation of your license, however if you were giving a ticket for the failure to comply as insturcted by the proceedures during a traffic stop, I wouldn't doubt you would have something to worry about.

Good luck

[asleepatthereel]

You are supposed to give the officer your drivers license AND your CHL when you are stopped and carrying a gun. I guess an argument could have been made that you werent carrying it, but IMO it would be weak at best. In short, I would guess the officer was correct. Ive been stopped before without my gun, and gave my CHL just as a courtesy. The law says you have to give it when you are carrying, even though the officer will know you have a CHL when he runs your TDL. Hopefully everything turned out ok for you.

[theinvisibleheart]

Thanks. Let me call the regulatory licensing bureau early morning.

Thanks!

--John

[asleepatthereel]

By the way, Welcome to the forum. There is alot to learn here. How long have you had your CHL? Perhaps you should go over the laws and make sure you are clear on them. There are alot of folks here that can give you sound advise.

[asleepatthereel]

If the officer didnt cite you for not presenting your CHL, I would just chalk it up as a lesson learned. Maybe check your status on the DPS website frequently for the next few months just to be sure, but I wouldnt call them and tell them that I violated the law by not presenting my CHL. The officer might not report it.

[carlson1]

If the officer didnt cite you for not presenting your CHL, I would just chalk it up as a lesson learned. Maybe check your status on the DPS website frequently for the next few months just to be sure, but I wouldnt call them and tell them that I violated the law by not presenting my CHL. The officer might not report it.

- Great Advice. By The Way Check Your PM.

[brianko]

Hate to be the bearer of bad news, but you're not out of the woods yet. First-time suspension of your CHL is an administrative, not criminal, procedure. The LEO doesn't have to cite you for failing to display your CHL:

(b) If a peace officer believes a reason listed in Subsection (a) to suspend a license exists, the officer shall prepare an affidavit on a form provided by the department stating the reason for the suspension of the license and giving the department all of the information available to the officer at the time of the preparation of the form. The officer shall attach the officer's reports relating to the license holder to the form and send the form and the attachments to the appropriate division of the department at its Austin headquarters not later than the fifth working day after the date the form is prepared. The officer shall send a copy of the form and the attachments to the license holder. If the license holder has not surrendered the license or the license was not seized as evidence, the license holder shall surrender the license to the appropriate division of the department not later than the 10th day after the date the license holder receives the notice of suspension from the department unless the license holder requests a hearing from the department. The license holder may request that the justice court in the justice court precinct in which the license holder resides review the suspension as provided by Section 411.180. If a request is made for the justice court to review the suspension and hold a hearing, the license holder shall surrender the license on the date an order of suspension is entered by the justice court.

[theinvisibleheart]

Hate to be the bearer of bad news, but you're not out of the woods yet. First-time suspension of your CHL is an administrative, not criminal, procedure. The LEO doesn't have to cite you for failing to display your CHL:

(b) If a peace officer believes a reason listed in Subsection (a) to suspend a license exists, the officer shall prepare an affidavit on a form provided by the department stating the reason for the suspension of the license and giving the department all of the information available to the officer at the time of the preparation of the form. The officer shall attach the officer's reports relating to the license holder to the form and send the form and the attachments to the appropriate division of the department at its Austin headquarters not later than the fifth working day after the date the form is prepared. The officer shall send a copy of the form and the attachments to the license holder. If the license holder has not surrendered the license or the license was not seized as evidence, the license holder shall surrender the license to the appropriate division of the department not later than the 10th day after the date the license holder receives the notice of suspension from the department unless the license holder requests a hearing from the department. The license holder may request that the justice court in the justice court precinct in which the license holder resides review the suspension as provided by Section 411.180. If a request is made for the justice court to review the suspension and hold a hearing, the license holder shall surrender the license on the date an order of suspension is entered by the justice court.

Thanks. This is a great lesson. I'll ask the bureau if it applies to hg beside you in compartment. I was told by the ofc. that carry in the vehicle only applies to travel, not driving.

Thanks for the info.

--John

[Morgan]

"travel not driving".... I'd love to see where the law makes a distinction here.... but as a still (patiently waiting) non-CHL owner, I'm ALWAYS on a long trip. Even if I'm driving from my house to the grocery store, if I'm asked, I'm on my way to Houston. That "you're not traveling, you're driving around town" thing is lame bull

[Originalist]

If the weapon in on or about your person (loaded and close) and you had your CHL with you, you were carrying under the authority of your CHL and were obligated to hand over your CHL with your DL because you were asked for ID. If you have a CHL and it was not with you then you would have been covered under the Motorist Protection Act. I know there is some heartburn and/or questions about why you should have to advertise to the officer if those under the MPA do not but I think you need to apply the more strict standard in this and therefor I believe if the officer reports you, you will get a suspension. My 0.02

[mr.72]

Funny how this forum works sometimes.

I think there is a legitimate conflict in the law as it currently stands.

Before the MPA, which made it broadly and generally legal to be carrying while in your car without a CHL, the only clear legal way to be carrying in your car as a general rule was to have a CHL. Now due to the MPA, pretty much anyone can carry in their car without a CHL.

Now, it is true that if you are carrying, you have to present your CHL when you are asked for ID by a peace officer. However, there is a legitimate question as to whether if you are carrying in your car, which does not require you to have a CHL, then do you have to present your CHL? If you didn't have a CHL, then you would not be in any violation. How can having a CHL subject you to a harsher standard of compliance?

I suspect there is a good argument to be made that the MPA supersedes this requirement to produce your CHL while at a traffic stop. Who knows what a judge would think. I have a friend who is a judge. I guess I should ask him.

I would like to see how this plays out. However, I still think presenting your CHL in a traffic stop is a good idea just from a practical standpoint. Seems a lot of folks get off with only warnings and no citations when they present the CHL at a traffic stop upfront.

[Purplehood]

What is this about travelling, and not driving? I thought that the Motorist Protection Act precluded the requirement to be travelling and carrying a concealed weapon in your vehicle? Was the LEO making a misstatement?

[flintknapper]

Funny how this forum works sometimes.

I think there is a legitimate conflict in the law as it currently stands.

Before it was broadly and generally legal to be carrying while in your car without a CHL, then the only clear legal way to be carrying in your car as a general rule was to have a CHL. Now the law has changed and pretty much anyone can carry in their car without a CHL.

Now, it is true that if you are carrying, you have to present your CHL when you are asked for ID by a peace officer. However, there is a legitimate question as to whether if you are carrying in your car, which does not require you to have a CHL, then do you have to present your CHL? If you didn't have a CHL, then you would not be in any violation. How can having a CHL subject you to a harsher standard of compliance?

I suspect there is a good argument to be made that the car-carry law supersedes this requirement to produce your CHL while at a traffic stop. Who knows what a judge would think. I have a friend who is a judge. I guess I should ask him.

I would like to see how this plays out. However, I still think presenting your CHL in a traffic stop is a good idea just from a practical standpoint. Seems a lot of folks get off with only warnings and no citations when they present the CHL at a traffic stop upfront.

I'd like to know his response.

I think the subject matter of this post should be thoroughly examined and the laws surrounding it made clear in future legislation.

Good post!

[Originalist]

Funny how this forum works sometimes.

I think there is a legitimate conflict in the law as it currently stands.

Before the MPA, which made it broadly and generally legal to be carrying while in your car without a CHL, the only clear legal way to be carrying in your car as a general rule was to have a CHL. Now due to the MPA, pretty much anyone can carry in their car without a CHL.

Now, it is true that if you are carrying, you have to present your CHL when you are asked for ID by a peace officer. However, there is a legitimate question as to whether if you are carrying in your car, which does not require you to have a CHL, then do you have to present your CHL? If you didn't have a CHL, then you would not be in any violation. How can having a CHL subject you to a harsher standard of compliance?

I suspect there is a good argument to be made that the MPA supersedes this requirement to produce your CHL while at a traffic stop. Who knows what a judge would think. I have a friend who is a judge. I guess I should ask him.

I would like to see how this plays out. However, I still think presenting your CHL in a traffic stop is a good idea just from a practical standpoint. Seems a lot of folks get off with only warnings and no citations when they present the CHL at a traffic stop upfront.

I agree wholeheartedly, I dont think CHLers should have to self ID to the police. However, the way the law reads if you have a firearm in your car and you have your CHL, because the stricter standard applies to the CHL, you should follow that area. I mean who gets to pick under which area of law you were carrying under, an admin person at DPS, a LEO, A Judge or a jury. There needs to be some clarification on this but I think we could make the argument, In the 2 years we have had unlicensed carry in cars, cops have not been shot at hand over fist, so lets take this requirement away from CHLers since they HAVE gone through checks/training/etc.