TexasCHLforum.com

Nitrogen, that was better than what I was about to post before I refreshed my thread view.

I am not sure if this will help at all, but here goes:

A charge on 30.05 will not stick on a CHLer if the CHLer was considered trespassing only because they were carrying a concealed handgun with their CHL. A concealed handgun with CHL cannot, by itself, turn a non-trespasser into a trespasser under 30.05. Ideally, LEOs that arrest a CHLer for tresspass under 30.05 should be able to articulate something relevant elsewhere in 30.05 besides 30.05(f) if that someone possessed a CHL with (or without) a concealed handgun.

I would hope that ~99% of the time, charges will not be filed that cannot be substantiated; the CHLer shows his Texas DL and CHL, and as long as there is no element of tresspass elsewhere in 30.05, the LEOs let him go. That does not mean that under certain . . . unique circumstances, you may have to go through the complete legal route (ticket or arrest, trial, etc), as opposed to a temporary detention at the scene. I would expect/hope most LEOs are not going to ticket or waste jail space on someone who is going to be vindicated in court anyway.

That said, the Duke lacrosse rape trial fiasco is an easy, though extreme, example of being put through the wringer just because there are unethical people in positions of power, who have incentives or motivation to try to push a case through despite inconsistencies, inconvenient details, etc.