TexasCHLforum.com

Co-Workers up and quit today (grrrr two weeks notice people, why is that so hard?) and her husband came and got her stuff.
He's an LEO in Jonestown, just spit balling here, is their a way we could have asked him legally to not come in with his gun?

Sure. You can ask him to polish your shoes, too; but he doesn't have to do either.

The straight answer is that you can set any conditions on entering private property that is not open to the public (that is, a public accommodation). If the officer is not performing his official duties, he has no more power than any other person.

On the opinion side, we complain when LEOs disarm CHL holders who are on good behavior. Why would you worry that a LEO would shoot up the place because his wife quit? And if he were going to do so, how would asking him to disarm himself stop him?

- Jim

I wasnt worried about him shooting up the place (I shoot back), just curious if I could

In general, you can legally ask anyone to do anything that is not a solicitation of a crime.

LEOs can legally enter private property without permission and with force if they are serving a warrant that permits them to do so. LEOs and a few other public servants (firemen, for example) can enter a place based on exigent circumstances such as someone shouting for help or flames shooting out the windows. That's about it, unless I forgot something.

- Jim

Since he had a right to be there to pick up his wife's stuff...you could not require he disarm as a condition of entry. And if he is anything like me...he wouldn't.

gigag04 wrote:Since he had a right to be there to pick up his wife's stuff...you could not require he disarm as a condition of entry. And if he is anything like me...he wouldn't.

It's fundamentally no different than 30.06 notice on government property, including gun shows (property that's not a premises or other place on which the license holder is prohibited from carrying the handgun under Section 46.03 or 46.035)

There are a couple points here that I think need correction. The first is that the man did not have a "right" to be there to pick up his wife's stuff. Sorry, Gigag04, but there is no such right and the company could have legally refused to give him the material. They could not refuse to give it to the wife, but there is no evidence presented that the husband has any legal right to the property. They could also refuse the wife entry to the property, assuming responsibility for boxing the property up and bringing it out or sending it to her.

There is no legal way to prevent a cop from carrying a weapon on private property. You can ask him to leave the property, but only if it is for some other reason. Penal Code section 30.05 clearly states that it does not apply to peace officers, whether on duty or not, if the sole reason for the request to leave is his carrying a weapon.

Subsection 30.05(i):

(i) This section does not apply if:
(1) the basis on which entry on the property or land or in the building was forbidden is that entry with a handgun or other weapon was forbidden; and
(2) the actor at the time of the offense was a peace officer, including a commissioned peace officer of a recognized state, or a special investigator under
Article 2.122, Code of Criminal Procedure, regardless of whether the peace officer or special investigator was engaged in the actual discharge of an official
duty while carrying the weapon.

srothstein wrote:There are a couple points here that I think need correction. The first is that the man did not have a "right" to be there to pick up his wife's stuff. Sorry, Gigag04, but there is no such right and the company could have legally refused to give him the material. They could not refuse to give it to the wife, but there is no evidence presented that the husband has any legal right to the property. They could also refuse the wife entry to the property, assuming responsibility for boxing the property up and bringing it out or sending it to her

Is it not both their property according to the state? I guess that is where I'm confused. Other than this I agree with your post. That is where I was getting the "right" to get the stuff from. Definitely trust your knowledge of common property more than mine.

Common property is a really gray area that tends to be abused and misunderstood by police officers and the public. I am not really that up on it either, but it really only comes into play in a divorce. As I understand it, even in probate court the concept gets confusing with the spouse having to inherit the property but at the same time having full rights to it as joint owner.

One of the areas thta has bitten cops before is in giving property to one party or the other in disturbances and other cases. The best advice is to be strictly neutral if both sides claim ownership and give it to neither. One can take it and you don't stop them, but you give to neither.

And to keep this somewhat related to the original case (trying to avoid too much thread drift), that is how the company can keep the off duty cop from entering the property. They might let the original possessor back in or they can box it up and ship it. I truly recommend that if an employee leaves the premises permanently (either quits or is fired) and leaves property there, that the very first thing done is someone boxing up the property and getting it shipped to them as quickly as possible. If someone quits without notice, there is often some other factor involved and this helps keep the employer out of involvement in any family disputes.

Speaking of divorce, did you hear Mattel has
now brought out a "Divorced" Barbie doll?

She comes with all Ken's stuff. :-)

SIA

I'm sorry so the answer is for an off duty, out of uniform, out of jurisdiction officer, CANT be asked to disarm before coming on private property?
Can they also ignore 51% signs and 30.06s? I'm not LEO bashing, I truly want to know

marksiwel wrote:I'm sorry so the answer is for an off duty, out of uniform, out of jurisdiction officer, CANT be asked to disarm before coming on private property?
Can they also ignore 51% signs and 30.06s? I'm not LEO bashing, I truly want to know

51% and 30.06 do not apply to LEO's.

PC 30.06, 46.02, 46.03, and 46.035 do not apply too LEOs, judges, and a few other official positions, whether on duty or not. This is clear if you read the laws, including 46.15(a).

However, they may be subject to department rules that a non-LEO citizen is not. For example, an officer that I know said that if they are suspected of being under the influence and blow more than 0.01, they will be formally disciplined.

I want to clarify my understanding of what Steve wrote. I understand that according to PC 30.05, a LEO cannot be prohibited from entering a place that is open to the public, based on the fact that he is armed.

However, I can't believe that a LEO or anyone else can enter private property that is not open to the public, against the will of the property owner, for personal reasons.

- Jim

seamusTX wrote:However, I can't believe that a LEO or anyone else can enter private property that is not open to the public, against the will of the property owner, for personal reasons.

I know that there is a gated apartment complex here, and one of our officers made the owner/mgr of the complex so mad they wanted a Criminal Tresspass Warning issued against him and it couldn't be done. Not sure how "public" that is, but since he is on duty when he is there, she can't prevent him from entering the grounds.


As for as 30.06 - the wording explicitly dictates that it only relevant to CHL holders. The rest of the weapons offenses, LEOs are exepted from. And yes - pretty much every dept I know has something written saying you will not carry or display a badge while consuming alcohol (unless you are UC).

srothstein wrote:There are a couple points here that I think need correction. The first is that the man did not have a "right" to be there to pick up his wife's stuff. Sorry, Gigag04, but there is no such right and the company could have legally refused to give him the material. They could not refuse to give it to the wife, but there is no evidence presented that the husband has any legal right to the property. They could also refuse the wife entry to the property, assuming responsibility for boxing the property up and bringing it out or sending it to her.

There is no legal way to prevent a cop from carrying a weapon on private property. You can ask him to leave the property, but only if it is for some other reason. Penal Code section 30.05 clearly states that it does not apply to peace officers, whether on duty or not, if the sole reason for the request to leave is his carrying a weapon.

Subsection 30.05(i):

(i) This section does not apply if:
(1) the basis on which entry on the property or land or in the building was forbidden is that entry with a handgun or other weapon was forbidden; and
(2) the actor at the time of the offense was a peace officer, including a commissioned peace officer of a recognized state, or a special investigator under
Article 2.122, Code of Criminal Procedure, regardless of whether the peace officer or special investigator was engaged in the actual discharge of an official
duty while carrying the weapon.

Are you sure about that? Texas is a community property state. My understanding is that both the husband and the wife control the property and each can do with it as he or she sees fit without involving the other partner. (I wouldn't reccomend doing that, however ) If so, it seems to me that in that case either partner would have the right to pick up said property.