E.Marquez wrote:Sangiovese wrote:I think the formatting of the information has resulted in some confusion. .
You may be on to something.
http://law.onecle.com/texas/criminal-pr ... 19.00.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
The language we have been reading snippets of sure seems to support a NCIC check..
But when you open and READ the entire section of 18.19
Texas Code of Criminal Procedure Article 18.19 -
Disposition Of Seized Weapons
(a) Weapons seized in connection with an offense involving the use of a weapon or an offense under Penal Code Chapter 46 shall be held ...
it is no long so clear that the subsection applies to a weapon taken for "safety" during a stop or other contact for a minor violation.
I'm even more convinced at this point neither laymen or lawman will unravel this one... It will take some lawyer work and perhaps an AG opinion and a rewrite of some code, regulation and law to make it clear.
It seems very clear to me that the section 18.19 reference in the DPS response is part of section 5.09 of the DPS policy, which defines how they deal with seized property. If you read it as formatted in my earlier post, it is very clear. Section 5.09 of the DPS policy has 4 numbered items and the 18.19 reference is in number 4. Numbers 1-4 of section 5.09 of their policy gives the penal code or criminal procedure code that covers each listed type of seized property.
The next section of their policy (5.10) is what directs them to run the checks. That section (at least the portion that they provided) does not reference any statute or code mandating running the checks. So what it looks like we are dealing with is simply DPS policy directing their officers to run the check whenever they come into possession of a firearm, and then to attach the results of that check if they seize the firearm.
I am going to add line numbers in red to the 3 lines that are causing the confusion.
1 - Certain Weapons. Article 18.19, CCP, and Chapter 46, PC.
2 - 05.10 Weapons
3 - 1.Firearms and Other Weapons (knives, blackjack, club, etc.). When a firearm comes into the possession of a DPS officer, for any reason, the officer will check with NCIC for a possible stolen report.
Line 1 is item number 4 in section 5.09 of the DPS policy.
Line 2 is the heading for section 5.10 of the DPS policy
Line 3 is item number 1 in section 5.10 of the DPS policy.
With the formatting of the original post, it is easy to look at it and think that line 1 is a heading for 5.10, but when you look closer it isn't. It is part of the previous section and has nothing to do with the NCIC check that the policy mandates.
This is all tangental to the main point... all this means is that the check they are running is mandated by policy, not by law.
The main point is that some people believe they are using officer safety (authorized to disarm by law) as a pretext to gain control of a weapon simply so they may then, as a matter of policy run the background check.
I have no opinion about whether they are doing this because I have no firsthand information or experience with it. I have had occasion to show my CHL to 3 different officers since I received it. One was a DPS trooper responding to an accident in which I was rear ended. In all of those cases my firearm was holstered on my hip. I was not disarmed in any of them.
NRA Endowment Member. Texas LTC Instructor. NRA certified Pistol & Home Firearm Safety Instructor - Range Safety Officer
Any comments about legal matters are general in nature and are not legal advice. Nothing posted on this forum is intended to establish an attorney-client relationship.
. However, I ran across this article when I was doing some research on the Houston police chief. The numbers seem kind of high to me.