Skip to main content
Feb18
Love6
Brass Knuckles, Silencers and Prohibited Weapons in Texas

What Weapons Are Illegal to Possess in Texas?

ByWeapons Charges

Prohibited Weapons in Texas | Are Brass Knuckles Illegal in Texas?

Brass Knuckles, Silencers and Prohibited Weapons in TexasYes, brass knuckles are illegal to possess in Texas. Under Texas’ Open Carry laws, qualified Texans can now carry a handgun in a holster on their waist just like they could in the Wild West. But there are still many other weapons that are illegal to possess or carry in Texas. Section 46.05 of the Texas Penal Code outlines the weapons that are prohibited to possess in Texas. The following is the list of weapons that are prohibited weapons in the state of Texas under Section 46.05:

  • Explosive weapons*
  • Machine guns*
  • Short-barrel firearms*
  • Firearm silencers*
  • Brass knuckles
  • Armor-piercing ammunition
  • Chemical dispensing devises
  • Zip guns; and
  • Tire deflation devices

*However, explosive weapons, machine guns, short-barrel firearms, and firearm silencers will not be considered prohibited weapons if the item is registered in the National Firearms Registration and Transfer Record.  There is no such exception for brass knuckles in Texas.

What are the Consequences of Possessing Brass Knuckles or a Prohibited Weapon in Texas? | What is the Punishment for Possession of Silencers?

A person commits a criminal offense if they intentionally or knowingly possess, manufacture, transport, repair, or sell any of the prohibited weapons.

  • Possession of an explosive weapon, machine gun, short-barrel firearm, firearm silencer, armor-piercing ammunition, chemical dispensing device, or a zip gun is a third degree felony, punishable from 2-10 years in prison and a fine of up to $10,000
  • The possession of a tire deflation device is a state jail felony, punishable from 6 months to 2 years in a State Jail Facility and a fine of up to $10,000.
  • Finally, the possession of brass knuckles is a Class A misdemeanor, punishable by 0 – 365 days in county jail and a fine up to $4,000.

Defending Against a Brass Knuckles Charge | What Defenses are Available in a Prohibited Weapons Case?

For persons charged with possession of brass knuckles and other prohibited weapons offenses, there are several defenses that are recognized under the law.

  • It is a defense if the person’s conduct was in connection to the performance of official duty by the armed forces or National Guard, a governmental law enforcement agency, or a correctional facility.
  • Also, it is an affirmative defense if the person was dealing with a tire deflation device or armor-piercing ammunition solely for the performance in one of those official duties.
  • An affirmative defense is also provided to a person dealing with a short-barrel firearm or tire deflation device solely as an antique or curio.
  • Lastly, it is a defense if the possession of a chemical dispensing device if the person is a commissioned security officer and has received training on the use of the device by a training program provided by the Texas Commission on Law Enforcement or approved by the Texas Private Security Board of the Department of Public Safety.

Prohibited Weapons and Brass Knuckles Defense Attorneys in Fort Worth, Texas

If you are under investigation for a prohibited weapons case or if you have been charged with possession of a prohibited weapon, contact our team of Fort Worth criminal defense attorneys today. We provide a free consultation on every criminal case. As avid hunters with military experience, we are familiar firearms laws and defenses in Texas. Contact us today at (817) 993-9249.

 

Fort Worth Violent Crimes Attorney
Rating:★★★★★ 5 / 5 stars
Rated ByGoogle User
“Can’t thank this team enough for what they did for our family.”

 

Feb12
Love8
Man sitting on a chair with head in hands, expressing distress, with the text "THE STATUTORY RAPE DILEMMA" above and the logo of Howard Lotspeich Alexander & Williams, PLLC at the bottom, reflecting the complexities of statutory rape laws in Texas.

The Statutory Rape Dilemma in Texas

BySex Crimes

Man sitting on a chair with head in hands, expressing distress, with the text "THE STATUTORY RAPE DILEMMA" and branding of Howard Lotspeich Alexander & Williams, PLLC in a somber setting.Of the various types of criminal cases we defend in Fort Worth, Texas, Statutory Rape can be one of the more frustrating. First, a word of clarification; the term “Statutory Rape” does not actually appear in the Texas Penal Code. What I refer to as Statutory Rape is actually Sexual Assault of a person under 17 years of age (and over 14 years of age) under Section 22.011(a)(2). To understand what I mean about our frustration, consider this example (based on a true story).

The Story of Sam | A Common Statutory Rape Example

A 22 year-old attractive young man, let’s call him Sam, is filling up his car (a BMW) at a gas station when an attractive young woman (Nadia) approaches him and tells him how she admires his car. Nadia then tells Sam that she thinks he is cute and gives Sam her phone number. Nadia is younger than Sam, but he’s not exactly sure how much younger. She is fully developed and is dressed in mature clothing. Over the next few days Nadia and Sam send each other text messages. The messages are flirty at first and then Nadia turns the conversation toward sexual things. Sam is a bit surprised by how forward Nadia is, but he welcomes the banter. Sam then asks Nadia how old she is because he’s always heard the old adage “16’ll get ya 20.” Nadia tells Sam that she is 18 and says that she’ll show him an ID indicating the same when they get together. She then asks Sam to come pick her up in his BMW and take her to a park near her house. Sam agrees.

At the park, Nadia shows Sam her Texas ID, which says that she is indeed 18 years old. Sam and Nadia then engage in consensual sex, after which Sam takes Nadia home. Sometime during the next few days, Nadia’s mother gets ahold of her cell phone and notices the messages between her and Sam. When she confronts Nadia, Nadia admits that she and Sam had sex. Nadia’s mother is furious and calls the police to report Sam for child sexual assault. The police conduct a quick investigation wherein Sam admits to having sex with Nadia. After all, he thought he was doing nothing wrong since she was 18. The police then arrest Sam for statutory rape for having consensual sex with a 16 year-old. Nadia is only 16.

Statutory Rape is a Strict-Liability Offense

Statutory rape (Sexual Assault under Texas Penal Code Section 22.011(a)(2)) is a strict liability offense in Texas. What does this mean? It means that a person is guilty if:

  1. The person is older than 18 years of age; and
  2. The person intentionally or knowingly has sex with someone younger than 17 years of age.

*There is an exception to the law is the actors are less than 3 years apart in age, meaning that if the minor is 16 and the partner is 19 (but not more than 3 years older) then he will not be charged.

Other than the 3-year age gap exception, there are no other exceptions to statutory rape in Texas, hence strict liability. There is no Consent defense; consent is irrelevant for this offense. There is not Mistake of Fact defense when the minor lies about her age and no Mistake of Law defense for when the actors don’t know what the age of consent is in Texas. That is why we call this one of the more frustrating offenses in the Texas Penal Code.

Let’s take Sam’s case. Sam genuinely had no idea that Nadia was only 16. In fact, short of asking for her birth certificate, he showed due diligence in finding out her age before they had sex. He asked about her age and even saw her identification, which we now know was a fake ID. How can the state punish Sam when he tried to do everything right (fornication arguments aside)?

We often encounter this scenario or one like it. Our Fort Worth sexual assault defense attorneys have been able to get charges reduced under these circumstances. Many times, if we are hired before the grand jury considers the case, we will request to make a presentation to the grand jury and highlight these facts, urging the grand jury to no-bill the case and dismiss it. When we are negotiating with prosecutors on these types of cases, we do everything we can to get the charge amended to a different offense that doesn’t require sex offender registration (e.g. Injury to a Child). We have had considerable success in doing this, but it can be fact dependent (and personality dependent).

Sex Offender Registration for Consensual Sex with a Minor

Make no mistake; a conviction for statutory rape requires the offender to register as a sex offender in Texas. In fact, Statutory Rape is a lifetime registration offense. So although it may seem like a minor offense based on an age technicality, it is terribly serious. Further, even if your attorney is able to get your case reduced to a non-sex offense and you do not have to register as a sex offender, the court might still require you to undergo sex offender caseload on probation. You should fight this requirement as the sex offender caseload can be extremely difficult (and frustrating), especially when you never had the intent to commit a crime in the first place.

Free Consultation with a Fort Worth Statutory Rape Defense Attorney

If you are under investigation or have been charged with a Statutory Rape offense, contact our team of Tarrant County criminal defense attorneys. Our attorneys have the knowledge and experience to defend your future and your name with care and compassion. Contact us today at (817) 993-9249.

Feb10
Love8
Sex offender passport requirements graphic featuring multiple passports with stamps, emphasizing legal implications for sex offenders under International Megan’s Law.

New Law Requires Certain Sex Offenders to Have Identifying Mark on Their Passports

BySex Crimes

Sex offender passport requirements with multiple U.S. passports and travel documents, emphasizing legal implications of International Megan’s Law.On February 8, 2016, President Obama signed International Megan’s Law after it unanimously passed in Congress. International Megan’s Law has been put into place to prevent child exploitation and other sexual crimes through advanced notification of traveling sex offenders. The law will implement new notification requirements for sex offenders as well as require unique identifying marks on sex offender’s passports.

Read the language of the bill here.

Who is Required to Have an Identifying Mark on Their Passport under the International Megan’s Law?

The new law provides two categories of “covered” sexual offenders that will have to have this mark on their passport:

  1. Sex offenders convicted of a sex offense against a minor; and
  2. Any individual that is required to register in the sex offender registry of any jurisdiction in the National Sex Offender Registry because of an offense against a minor.

What Are the New Requirements for Sex Offenders Traveling Abroad?

Covered sex offenders must now provide to the appropriate official any information relating to their intended travel outside of the United States, including anticipated dates and all flight information, address or other contact information while outside of the U.S., purpose for travel, and any other travel-related information. The sex offender must update any changes to this information. If a sex offender knowingly fails to provide such information they shall be fined, imprisoned for not more than 10 years, or both.

What Will Occur When Sex Offenders Decide to Travel Abroad?

The Angel Watch Center will be established to perform activities required by the law to gain information on sex offenders traveling abroad. The Center, not later than 48 hours before scheduled departure, will use all relevant databases, systems and sources of information to:

  • Determine if individuals traveling abroad are listed on the National Sex Offender Registry
  • Review lists of individuals who have provided advanced notice of international travel, and
  • Provide a list of those individuals to the United States Marshals Service’s National Sex Offender Targeting Center (Targeting Center) not in the system to determine compliance with sex offender registration requirements.

When Will Advanced Notice Be Given to Destination Countries?

The Center may give relevant information to an individual’s destination country if the individual was identified as having provided advanced notice of international travel, or if after completing the Center’s activities described above, the Center receives information pertaining to a sex offender from the Targeting Center.

Additionally, the Center may immediately give relevant information to the destination country if the Center becomes aware of a sex offender traveling outside of the U.S. within 24 hours of their intended travel and simultaneously completes the Center’s activities, or if within 24 hours of intended travel, the Center has not yet received the information pertaining to the sex offender from the Targeting Center.

What is the Process for Issuing Passports to Sex Offenders?

The Secretary of State cannot issue a passport to a covered sex offender unless the passport contains a unique identifier. Further, a passport previously issued without an identifier may be revoked. The unique identifier has not been determined yet.

The Secretary of State may reissue a passport without a unique identifier if an individual reapplies for a passport and the Angel Watch Center provides written determination that the individual is no longer required to register as a covered sex offender.

What About Sex Offenders Entering Into the United States?

Upon receiving notification that an individual who has committed an offense of a sexual nature is attempting to enter the United States, the Center will immediately share all of the information on the individual with the Department of Justice and other Federal, State, and local entities as appropriate.

Conclusion

Under this new law, sex offenders who have committed offenses pertaining to a minor child will now be required to give notification of any intended international travel and will likely have to have a passport with a unique identifying mark. Sex offenders who already have passports should be prepared for reissuance of one with the identifying mark. This mark will alert officials that this individual has committed an offense against a child. Further, destination countries will be notified of any relevant information on the sex offender. It is important to stay up to date on the requirements and implications set forth by International Megan’s Law to avoid any unintentional violations of the new requirements.

The law is still new and right now there are more questions than answers.  Interested parties should be diligent to stay informed as the implementation of this law is rolled out.

Feb09
Love3
Silhouetted military figure saluting against a sunset, with text "Representing Military Defendants in Texas" and logo of Howard Lotspeich Alexander & Williams, PLLC.

3 Things To Avoid When Representing a Military Defendant

ByVeterans

Criminal Defense Attorneys Defending a Military Defendant Must Be Careful Not to Make These Mistakes

Silhouette of a soldier saluting against a sunset backdrop with text overlay "Representing Military Defendants in Texas" and logo of Howard Lotspeich Alexander & Williams, PLLC.Texas has its fair share of military bases and military servicemembers. Sometimes those servicemembers get into trouble, be it for DWI, Domestic Violence, or other criminal offenses. The military defendant, who usually has no criminal history, is not savvy with the Texas criminal justice system and must rely solely on the criminal defense attorney he selects to represent them. Below are some of the mistakes that I’ve seen when a non-military criminal defense attorney represents a military defendant. These are my opinions and should not be attributable to the United States Marine Corps or any government agency.

Mistake #1 – Allowing Your Client to Wear His Uniform to Court

You should not ask or allow your military criminal client to wear his service uniform to court. I understand that you may think his uniform will win him favor with the judge or the prosecutor, but it doesn’t. Anecdotally, I’ve spoken with several judges and prosecutors on this issue and it never inures to your client’s benefit. Whether you believe it or not, the general public (including judge and prosecutors) holds our military to a higher standard than the average defendant. Rightly or wrongly, they expect more from them and don’t like to see them as a criminal defendant. By allowing your client to wear his uniform, you skyline him and lower our Armed Forces in public esteem in the process. Unless it is an absolute emergency and his uniform is the only thing keeping your client from appearing in court naked, please ask him to wear the same thing your other clients wear to court. A court setting for a criminal case is the last place your client wants to be noticed in his dress uniform.

Mistake #2 – Not Considering the Military Consequences of a Disposition

When representing military servicemember, you need to ask and learn about the military consequences of the criminal case. Some criminal case dispositions trigger mandatory reporting to the member’s chain of command, which could (and often does) result in negative consequences in the military. Other types of cases (e.g. Domestic Violence) can result in your client losing the right to possess a firearm, which makes them non-deployable and virtually useless to their command. If your client does not know what his obligations are to his Service, seek out another attorney with military experience and ask them. DO NOT CALL YOUR CLIENT’S COMMAND OR THE BASE LEGAL COUNSEL. There is no privilege with base personnel and they will often be required to report your call to your client’s commander.

Mistake #3 – Not Requesting Your Client’s Military Record (OMPF)

Every servicemember has an OMPF or Official Military Personnel File. The OMPF will tell you everything you need to know about your client’s service. It will show you awards, deployments, performance ratings, disciplinary actions, and more. If you plan on using your client’s service as a positive mark in his favor, you should do your research to make sure that his service has indeed been positive. Your client may have below average ratings, several minor disciplinary infractions, and a Letters of Reprimand in his file. Or he may have combat awards, Letter of Appreciation, and early promotion recommendations. A savvy prosecutor will know all of this. The military shares information with the DA when requested. So before you drape yourself and your client in the flag, you should probably learn a little more about how “honorable” his service has been.

Military Veteran Representing Military Defendants in Texas State Courts

Brandon Barnett is a criminal defense attorney in Fort Worth, Texas with Barnett Howard & Williams PLLC. He is a veteran of the US Marine Corps and Operation Iraqi Freedom. He currently serves a reserve Military Judge for special and general courts-martial. Mr. Barnett teaches Military Justice at Texas A&M University School of Law in Fort Worth. For a free consultation of your Texas criminal case or to consult with Mr. Barnett about the potential military consequences of a criminal disposition, contact him at (817) 993-9249.

Feb04
Love4
Foreclosure sign on a house with text questioning if HUD qualifies as a "victim" under the Mandatory Victims Restitution Act, relevant to fraud and legal implications in the context of the case United States v. Benns.

Who Qualifies as a “Victim” Under the Mandatory Victims Restitution Act?

ByFraud

Definition of “Victim” under the MVRA, leaves HUD out in the Cold | Who Qualifies for Relief Under the Mandatory Victims Restitution Act?

Foreclosure notice over a house with text questioning HUD's victim status under the Mandatory Victims Restitution Act.United States v. Benns (5th Circuit, 2016) is a case regarding the Mandatory Victims Restitution Act (MVRA).  In this case, the US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit held that HUD is not a victim of the defendant’s crime, even though the HUD was out a considerable amount of money after defendant forged a credit application. Read more about USA v. Benns below.

Anxious Couple Seeks Help for Mortgage Default

Desperate for relief from a mortgage in arrears, Michael and Brenda Arnold conveyed ownership rights of their Arlington home to Rickey Benns. At the time of the conveyance, Benns agreed to rent the home and pay the mortgage from the profits made from future tenants. The mortgage loan, held by Bank of America and insured by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (“HUD”), remained in the Arnold family’s name. Unfortunately, Benns reneged on his agreement and failed to pay off the mortgage, triggering foreclosure proceedings against the Arnolds, unbeknownst to them.

Looming Foreclosure Leads to Desperate Acts of Forgery

In an attempt to prevent foreclosure of the property, Benns secretly tried to refinance the property. Benns forged Arnolds’s signatures on loan modification documents and used a false pay stub to trick the bank into believing the Arnolds were creditworthy and still owned the property. After the application was denied by the bank, the property was eventually foreclosed on and sold below market value. Because Bank of America’s mortgage was insured by HUD, HUD paid the bank $54,906.59—the difference between what HUD paid Bank of America following foreclosure and the later sale price of the property.

A Plea is Entered and Restitution is Ordered

Benns plead guilty to one count of making false statement on a credit application, a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1014. Upon entering the guilty plea, Benns “accepted the accuracy of a factual resume prepared by the government…author[izing] restitution to the victims of the community…includ[ing] restitution arising from all relevant conduct, not limited to that arising from the offense of conviction alone.” Benns was sentenced to twenty-seven months imprisonment, five years of supervised release, and ordered to pay restitution, totaling $544,602.42, under the federal Mandatory Victims Restitution Act (“MVRA”). Benns appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, arguing that HUD was not a victim of his convicted offense.

What is the Mandatory Victims Restitution Act (“MVRA”)?

The MVRA requires district courts to order restitution payments to crime victims during sentencing. 18 U.S.C. § 3663A. Under federal law, a victim is defined as, “a person directly and proximately harmed as a result of the commission of an offense for which restitution may be ordered.” Id. Typically, restitution is limited to losses arising from underlying conduct of a defendant’s offense of conviction. Hughley v. United States, 495 U.S. 411, 412-13 (1990); United States v. Espinoza, 677 F.3d 730, 732 (5th Cir. 2012); United States v. Maturin, 488 F.3d 657, 660-61 (5th Cir. 2007). To be a considered a victim under the MVRA, a person or organization must “suffer a foreseeable loss as a result of the conduct underlying the convicted offense.” Id. The government must establish, by a preponderance of the evidence, direct or proximate causation between the conduct underlying the offense and the actual loss suffered by the victim. United States v. Reese, 998 F.2d 1275, 1282 (5th Cir. 1993).

The Big Issue: Is HUD really a victim of Benns’s forgery scheme?

The United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit must determine whether HUD was a victim of Benn’s convicted offense. If the Court finds that HUD was a victim, then HUD will receive restitution under the MVRA. If the Court finds that HUD was not a victim, then Benns’ restitution award, which was imposed by the district court, could be amended or vacated altogether.

The Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit Weighs In with a Surprising Twist

Here, the Court weighs the argument made by the government against the facts of the case. The government argues that HUD’s loss was a direct result of Benn’s false credit application because the filing of the application itself delayed the foreclosure, which resulted in HUD selling the property at a loss. However, the Court states that the government did not produce evidence that the false credit application resulted in a delay, or that such a delay resulted in a greater loss for HUD than if HUD had sold the property any sooner than it actually did. The Court holds, because of the lack of evidence connecting the false credit application with the loss incurred by HUD, HUD is not to be considered a “victim” under the MVRA and, accordingly, cannot receive an award of restitution. “Benns was indicted and pleaded guilty to one count of filing a false credit application…it therefore does not follow that the behavior underlying Benn’s offense was the cause of HUD’s loss.”

Restitution could have only been awarded had the government established a direct or proximate causation between Benn’s false credit application and HUD’s loss when HUD sold the property at a foreclosure auction. The Court says the government failed to do so. Even though HUD was out $54,906.59, the Court does not consider HUD to be a victim of Benn’s convicted offense and vacates the restitution award.

Feb02
Love4
Judge writing notes on legal document with gavel and glasses on wooden desk, illustrating insights on being a judge in legal ethics context.

7 Pointers on Being a Judge

ByEthics

Some Words of Wisdom From the Top Military Appellate Bench

Judge writing notes with gavel and legal documents on desk, highlighting "7 Pointers on Being a Judge" relevant to legal education and insights for judges and attorneys.This week I am taking a break from my Fort Worth criminal defense cases to attend a Continuing Legal Eduction at the Air Force Judge Advocate General’s School at Maxwell Air Force Base in Montgomery, Alabama. I am a reserve military judge in the Marine Corps and this is one of the annual training requirements for military judges. In one of our periods of instruction, the Chief Judge from the Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces (the highest court in the military justice system) gave us seven helpful tips on Being a Judge. I found them to be simple yet incredibly insightful. As you read these, you’ll notice that they not only apply to military judges, but state judges, prosecutors, and criminal defense lawyers as well.

  1. Be Kind

  2. Be Patient

  3. Be Dignified

  4. Don’t Take Yourself Too Seriously

  5. Don’t Be Dismayed When You are Reversed* (*or overruled for the trial lawyers)

  6. Remember That There are No Unimportant Cases

  7. Don’t Forget Your Common Sense

Simple, insightful, and easy to apply to our practice every day. We would all do well to observe these tips as often as possible. Practicing criminal defense in Fort Worth, I am fortunate to observe my colleagues, adversaries, and judges applying these pointers all the time. But sometimes there are cases or opposing counsel that tempt us to violate some of these rules (especially rules 1-3). I am thankful for the reminders and will continue to apply them to my practice both on the bench in the military and in the courtroom in Fort Worth.

Some of my other favorite quotes that tie in with this advice:

“Be polite, be professional, but have a plan to kill everybody you meet.”

-General James “Mad Dog” Mattis, USMC (Retired)

“All you have to do is follow three simple rules. One, never underestimate your opponent. Expect the unexpected. Two take it outside. Never start anything inside the bar unless it’s absolutely necessary. And three, be nice.”

-Dalton (Patrick Swayze), Roadhouse

Jan27
Love7
Dark prison cell with light streaming through barred window, featuring text "Explaining Section 12.44" and law firm name "Howard Lotspeich Alexander & Williams, PLLC," relevant to Texas criminal defense and State Jail Felony cases.

Explaining Section 12.44 | Felony Reduced to Misdemeanor

BySentencing

What is Section 12.44(a) and Why Does it Matter to the State Jail Felony Defendant?

Explaining Section 12.44 graphic with text highlighting its significance for State Jail Felony defendants, featuring light streaming through prison bars and the logo of Howard Lotspeich Alexander & Williams, PLLC.Our Fort Worth criminal defense attorneys are routinely asked by family and friends of clients charged with State Jail Felony offenses about 12.44(a) and 12.44(b). Although it is sometimes elusive, our attorneys have had success in reducing State Jail Felony cases under Section 12.44. This article will discuss Sections 12.44(a) and 12.44(b) of the Texas Penal Code and explain why they are important to the State Jail Felony defendant.

State Jail Felony Punishment in Texas

In accordance with Section 12.35 of the Texas Penal Code, the confinement range for a State Jail Felony in Texas:

  • From 180 days to 2 years in a State Jail facility.

Any resulting conviction under Section 12.35 is considered a felony conviction for most purposes.

When a person is sentenced to confinement for a State Jail Felony offense, the sentence is served day for day. Aside from State Jail Diligent Participation Credit, a state jail sentence will last for every single day of the term, unlike a prison sentence, which may be cut short for parole or good time. For example, if someone receives a sentence for 12 months in state jail, that person will serve 365 actual days on the sentence.

What about 12.44?

Since parole and good time are not options for state jail time, Section 12.35 requires the defendant to serve that sentence day for day. However, section 12.44 of the Texas Penal Code allows for a reduction of the above consequences for someone charged with a state jail felony.

Sec. 12.44. REDUCTION OF STATE JAIL FELONY PUNISHMENT TO MISDEMEANOR PUNISHMENT.
(a) A court may punish a defendant who is convicted of a state jail felony by imposing the confinement permissible as punishment for a Class A misdemeanor if, after considering the gravity and circumstances of the felony committed and the history, character, and rehabilitative needs of the defendant, the court finds that such punishment would best serve the ends of justice.
(b) At the request of the prosecuting attorney, the court may authorize the prosecuting attorney to prosecute a state jail felony as a Class A misdemeanor.

Please note section 12.44 has two subsections. The differences between them are significant.

What is the Difference Between 12.44(a) and 12.44(b)?

12.44(a)

Under 12.44(a), at the discretion of the court, a state jail felony can be punished as a Class A misdemeanor. If convicted, the conviction results in a felony conviction. However, if sentenced to confinement, the defendant is allowed to serve time the same as if he were convicted of a Class A misdemeanor. That means the defendant can serve his time in the local county jail as opposed to a State Jail facility. That also may allow the defendant to have access to good time offered by the county jail in his jurisdiction (e.g. In Tarrant County, this could result in 2 for 1 credit or 3 for 1 if the defendant is a trustee).

12.44(b)

Under 12.44(b), at the discretion of the prosecutor, a state jail felony can be converted to a Class A misdemeanor. If convicted, the conviction results in a misdemeanor conviction. If incarcerated, the defendant would serve his time in the county jail the same as described in the above paragraph.
Note: Both 12.44(a) and (b) require the sentence to be within the penalty range of a Class A misdemeanor (0-365 days confinement and a fine, if any, not to exceed $4,000).

Probation Under 12.44

Straight Probation and Deferred Adjudication probation are also allowed under both 12.44(a) and 12.44(b). Straight probation would result in a conviction for a felony if reduced under 12.44(a) and a conviction for a misdemeanor if reduced under 12.44(b). If you receive deferred adjudication probation under either a 12.44(a) or 12.44(b) reduction, a conviction can be avoided altogether if the probation is successfully completed. Any future probation revocation proceedings by the state would be limited at sentencing to the misdemeanor punishment provided by section 12.44 as discussed in the paragraphs above.

Note: A probated sentence under 12.44 cannot exceed 2 years – the maximum time allowed for a probated sentence for a Class A misdemeanor.

State Jail Felony Defense Attorneys, Fort Worth, Texas

Depending on the circumstances, if you or someone you know is charged with a state jail felony in Texas, Section 12.44 may be applicable. There are many factors that the prosecutor or judge will consider if your attorney requests a 12.44 reduction. It is important to discuss your specific circumstances with your attorney. Please feel free to contact Barnett Howard & Williams PLLC if you have questions.

Jan25
Love3
Cell tower silhouette against a blue background with text "Privacy of Cell Tower Records" and logo of Howard Lotspeich Alexander & Williams, PLLC, relevant to legal discussions on privacy in murder cases.

Murder Case Hinges on the Privacy of Cell Tower Records

ByMurder

Was it an Unlawful Warrantless Search Under the 4th Amendment for the DA to Obtain Cell Tower Records From a Third Party and Use Them Against a Defendant Charged with Murder?

Ford v. State (2015) | San Antonio Murder Mystery

JCell tower silhouette against a blue background with text "PRIVACY OF CELL TOWER RECORDS" and logo of Howard Lotspeich Alexander & Williams, PLLC, relevant to legal discussions on privacy rights in criminal cases.on Ford and Dana Edwards dated off and on for two years in the small town of Alamo Heights, Texas. After a long break-up, the former couple saw each other at a friend’s New Year’s Eve party. The group of friends drank heavily and played “Apples to Apples,” an interactive game that required the participants to reveal their thoughts on personal topics. During the game, the subject of marriage came up and Ford was singled out about his on-again-off-again relationship with Edwards. Angry, Ford left the party before everyone else.

The next day, Edwards’s parents were expecting her in Fredericksburg, but she never showed. Worried, her parents drove to her condo, where they found her dead. Because she sustained lacerations and trauma to her head, the police opened up a murder investigation.

The State Gathers Evidence

On January 2nd, Ford volunteered to give a statement. In his statement, Ford said he left the party around 11:30 pm, went home, and fell asleep. Ford said that his new cell phone had been in his possession the entire night.

The investigators obtained video footage of the streets bordering Edwards’s condo, footage that conflicted with Ford’s official statement. At 11:24 pm, the camera captured a white SUV, similar to Ford’s vehicle, turn into the victim’s condo complex. At 1:00 am, Edwards’s car entered the complex. At 3:16 am, with the headlamps turned off, the white SUV exited the complex. No one could definitively say the white SUV belonged to Ford, as the license plate and registration stickers could not be determined because of the quality of the video.

A week later, the San Antonio District Attorney’s Office filed an application under Article 18.21 § 5(a) of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure, and in compliance with Communications Act, to obtain Ford’s historical cell-site-location records from AT&T Wireless.

Ford’s Case Goes to Trial

At trial, a radio network engineer from AT&T Wireless testified about the records. The engineer said that AT&T can tell where a cell phone is located by examining the sector information. He explained, “when a person sets up a call, receives a call, or sends a text, the person does so in communication with…sectors in the cell-phone network…[which] enables [AT&T] to look up the records for a particular phone number…determin[ing] [the] cell phone’s proximity to a cell…tower.” Ford v. State, 444 S.W.3d 171, 190 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2014). This is also true when the phone is not being actively used, as “unanswered texts and calls…automatic downloads….cause the [phone] to…ping the network to alert the network that the [phone] is in a particular…area.” Id.

According to AT&T, Ford’s cell records indicate that the numerous pings place Ford at the party, then at the victim’s condo complex and finally, at his home. The “ping” time frame also matches the timestamps from the camera footage for the unknown white SUV. Id.

The jury found Ford guilty of murder, sentencing him to forty years in prison. Ford appealed, and the court of appeals affirmed the verdict and sentence, relying upon the third party doctrine. Justice Chapa dissented in the court of appeals case, stating, in a nutshell, that Ford retained a reasonable expectation of privacy in his physical movements and location; he did not voluntarily surrender his expectation of privacy; and because the State did not secure a warrant before obtaining the records, Ford’s Fourth Amendment rights were violated. Ford appealed to the Criminal Court of Appeals (“CCA”).

The Big Issue | Privacy of Cell Tower Records

Did the State of Texas’ warrantless acquisition of historical cell-site-location information—recorded by a 3rd party cell-phone service provider—violate the Fourth Amendment? Did Ford have a reasonable expectation of privacy in his movements and location?

What does the law say about the expectation of privacy in cell phone records? What is the Third Party Doctrine?

The Fourth Amendment Guarantees , “the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures.” U.S. CONST. amend. IV. A person may appeal a verdict under a privacy theory if (1) he has a subjective expectation of privacy in the place or object searched, and (2) society…recognize[s] that expectation as reasonable. State v. Granville, 423 S.W.3d, 399, 405 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014).

The Third Party Doctrine allows for acquisition of information revealed to a third party (such as a cell phone company or a bank). Case law reflecting this doctrine suggests that information that must be disclosed [in the normal course of business] for the phone company to provide the requested service, is not off-limits to law enforcement and is not a violation of the Fourth Amendment. However, courts across the United States remain divided on this issue.

The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals Weighs in on Cell Phone Records and the Third Party Doctrine

Here, the CCA says that the DA’s office did not violate Ford’s Fourth Amendment rights because Ford had no legitimate expectation of privacy in records held by AT&T, records kept in the normal course of business, pointing to his location and movements in the past. AT&T uses the records for its own business purposes to improve network functionality. Moreover, phone service providers are required, by the FCC to locate a cell phone when a 911 call is placed. In re Application (Fifth Circuit), 724 F.3d at 611-12. Therefore, “The type of non-content evidence, lawfully created by a third-party telephone company for legitimate business purposes, does not belong to defendant[s], even if it concerns [a defendant].” United States v. Davis, 785 F.3d 498, 511 (11th Cir. 2015) . Acknowledging that Fourth Amendment claims may survive with in the case of GPS devices, or in long-term monitoring of individuals, the CCA affirms, holding, “In the circumstances [of this case], we do not see a jurisprudential reason to stray from the third-party doctrine.”

What could Ford v. State mean for you?

Generally speaking, your cell phone records, by way of the third-party doctrine, are subject to review by law enforcement and could be used against you in criminal proceedings in Texas. The CCA is saying that a reasonable person does not have a reasonable expectation of privacy in his or her cell tower records.

Jan24
Love4
Laptop displaying text "CHILD EROTICA DOES NOT RAISE PROBABLE CAUSE FOR POSSESSION OF CHILD PORNOGRAPHY" related to the case United States v. Edwards, relevant to legal discussions on child exploitation and criminal defense.

Child Erotica is Not Probable Cause for Possession of Child Pornography

ByComputer Crimes

10th Circuit Holds that Possession of Child Erotica Does Not Give Rise to the Likelihood of Possession of Child Pornography

Laptop displaying text "Child Erotica Does Not Raise Probable Cause for Possession of Child Pornography United States v. Edwards," relevant to legal discussion on child pornography laws by Howard Lotspeich Alexander & Williams, PLLC.Paul Edwards was charged with possession of child pornography (which is illegal) after officers executed a search warrant based on his possession of child erotica (which is not illegal). The search of Edwards’s home resulted in the discovery of thousands of images and videos of child pornography. Edwards filed a motion to suppress the images on the grounds that the affidavit failed to prove his possession of child erotica amounted to probable cause to believe that he also possessed child pornography. The court denied this motion and Edwards entered a conditional guilty plea, reserving his right to appeal the denial, and was sentenced to 63 months in jail followed by 7 years of supervised release.

Full Court Opinion: United States v. Edwards (USCA 10th Circuit, 2015)

The Probable Cause Affidavit that Led to the Search and Arrest

Edwards was identified by agents that were investigating a website for individuals suspected of child exploitation as an internet user that had shared 715 images of the same prepubescent girl, approximately 10 years old. In some of the photos the girl was clothed and in others she was “scantily clad.” The government acknowledged that the agents did not observe Edwards posting or viewing child pornography. Instead, the affidavit described the photos as child erotica and only provided evidence that Edwards possessed legal child erotica. The officer explained in the affidavit that those who collect child pornography are likely to collect child erotica but made no distinction that a possessor of child erotica is highly likely to also possess child porn. This opinion was used by the magistrate in issuing the warrant and again by the trial court in denying Edwards’s motion to suppress.

The Legal Significance: Child Erotica vs. Child Pornography

While it is legal to possess child erotica, it is illegal to possess child pornography. Here, child erotica is defined in the affidavit as “materials or items that are sexually arousing to persons having a sexual interest in minors but that are not, in and of themselves, obscene or that do not necessarily depict minors in sexually explicit poses or positions.” The affidavit further explains that child erotica “includes things such as fantasy writings, letters, diaries, books, sexual aids, souvenirs, toys, costumes, drawings, cartoons and non-sexually explicit visual images.”

Child pornography is any visual depiction, whether authentic or computer generated, of a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct. 18 U.S.C. §2256(8). To cross the line from legal child erotica to prohibited child pornography, there must be nudity that displays the genital area of the child and that display must also be lascivious. United States v. Horn, 187 F.3d 781. A photo is lascivious if it focuses on the genital area of a child and the apparent purpose of the photo is to arouse sexual desire. United States v. Kemmerling, 285 F3d 644.

Participation in Legal Conduct Does Not Prove Participation in Criminal Conduct

In many situations courts are hesitant to presume that defendants are more likely to engage in certain illegal activities based on their participation in a certain legal activity, as they should be. Similarly, here, the appellate court found that there is no sufficient connection between the posting of child erotica, a legal activity, and the possession of child porn that establishes probable cause to believe that child porn will be found in the home of the person who posted child erotica.

While some courts have found that the possession of child erotica is one factor that can be used to support probable cause of the possession of child porn, no court has found that one factor to be probative in making a probable cause determination. Instead, the courts look to the totality of the circumstances surrounding defendant’s said possession of child erotica to prove that such circumstances amount to the high probability that defendant is also in possession of child pornography.

The appellate court found that the affidavit lacked information based on the officer’s experience about the type of materials possessors of child erotica are highly likely to maintain and lacks any evidence to show that Edwards was a collector of child pornography. Further, the court determined that the information in the affidavit failed to provide a “substantial basis” to find probable cause that child porn would be found in Edward’s home.

Ultimately, this case is the perfect example that mere possession of child erotica cannot be used to prove that a defendant has committed the offense of possession of child pornography.

Jan20
Love1
Football on grass with cash bills and text overlay "Is Fantasy Football Illegal?" related to Texas gambling laws and Attorney General Ken Paxton's opinion on fantasy sports legality.

Texas Attorney General Says Fantasy Football Constitutes Illegal Gambling in Texas

ByGambling

Is Fantasy Football Illegal in Texas? AG Paxton Says “Yes.”

Football on grass with cash, featuring text "Is Fantasy Football Illegal?" and image of Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, relating to the legality of fantasy sports in Texas.Yesterday, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton issued an opinion stating that participating in daily fantasy football websites is illegal gambling in Texas. The opinion specifically states that participating in daily fantasy sports leagues is illegal gambling under section 47.02 of the Texas Penal Code.

Section 47.02 of the Texas Penal Code states that a person commits an offense if he or she makes a bet on the partial or final result of a game or contest or on the performance of a participant in a game or contest.

The key term that the Attorney General focused on in the opinion is the term “bet.” A “bet” is defined as an agreement to win or lose something of value solely or partially by chance. Texas Penal Code 47.01(1). Attorney General Paxton specifically stated that because the outcome of games in daily fantasy sports leagues depends partially on chance, an individual’s payment of a fee to participate in such activities is a “bet.”

Under 47.02 of the Texas Penal Code, gambling is a Class C misdemeanor offense, wherein offenders could face a fine of up to $500.00. Gambling under Section 47.02 of the Texas Penal Code is a fine-only offense that does not involve jail time as a punishment.

Can I keep playing daily fantasy sports?

It’s up to you. If you continue to play daily fantasy sports in Texas, you would be participating in illegal gambling as the law is interpreted by Attorney General Ken Paxton. Again, according to the attorney general, participating in daily fantasy football league sites constitutes a Class c misdemeanor.

Opponents of the AG’s opinion argue that daily fantasy sports involves skill to really win.  Mark Cuban, owner of the Dallas Mavericks, is one of the outspoken people who disagrees with the Paxton opinion.  He believes that just about everything in life and business involves chance and could be considered gambling as Paxton defines it.

What is important to remember though is that the attorney general cannot and will not be responsible for the actual investigation or prosecution of these cases. Local law enforcement and local district attorneys would be the responsible agencies for enforcing this law. Investigation of these cases would have to be tedious and would require a significant amount of resources in order to prosecute the lowest level of offense under Texas law. Whether the State would go to the extent needed to prove these types of gambling charges beyond a reasonable doubt is yet to be seen.

The law does allow a defense to prosecution for gambling if the person engages in gambling in a private place, no person receives any economic benefit other than personal winnings; and except for the advantage of skill or luck, the risks of losing and the chances of winning are the same for all participants.

What does this Fantasy Sports AG opinion mean for the average Texan?

The opinion means that, according to the State’s highest-ranking attorney, participating in daily fantasy sports leagues is illegal gambling. Now, it’s up to each local jurisdiction’s law enforcement agencies, prosecutors and courts to decide if prosecuting these cases is a priority or not. Law enforcement uses discretion on a daily basis as to what crimes and actions they should focus the bulk of their enforcement actions on. It’s unknown at this time if or whether law enforcement will spend the resources necessary to prosecute these cases.

Hopefully, if you choose to continue to play daily fantasy football, you are good at it and can cover your potential fines. We’ll have to wait and see which, if any, jurisdictions choose to enforce this opinion. Based on the resources it would take, I seriously doubt that we’ll see any citations written for this. Good luck out there!

Read the Texas AG Paxton Fantasy Football Opinion