BamBam wrote:Would this not validate the case against Taco Cabana or any other entity for improper signage?![]()
§ 30.05. CRIMINAL TRESPASS. (a) A person commits an
offense if he enters or remains on or in property, including an
aircraft or other vehicle, of another without effective consent or
he enters or remains in a building of another without effective
consent and he:
(1) had notice that the entry was forbidden; or
(2) received notice to depart but failed to do so.
(b) For purposes of this section:
(1) "Entry" means the intrusion of the entire body.
(2) "Notice" means:
(A) oral or written communication by the owner or
someone with apparent authority to act for the owner;
(B) fencing or other enclosure obviously
designed to exclude intruders or to contain livestock;
(C) a sign or signs posted on the property or at
the entrance to the building, reasonably likely to come to the
attention of intruders, indicating that entry is forbidden;
![banghead :banghead:](./images/smilies/banghead.gif)
You left out the rest of it;
(f) It is a defense to prosecution under this section that:
(1) the basis on which entry on the property or land or in the
building was forbidden is that entry with a handgun was forbidden; and
(2) the person was carrying a concealed handgun and a license
issued under Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code, to carry a
concealed handgun of the same category the person was carrying.