dicion wrote:srothstein wrote:No. you are misreading the law. The term effective notice is specifically defined in the one paragraph (b). Paragraph (e) is how to apply the section of the law, and does not affect the definition carried in paragraph (b).
Note that paragraph (b) says you are given notice when you are given the oral or written communication. Paragraph (c) then defines the communication, but the notice itself is already defined. Paragraph (d) then tells you what grade of offense. It does not affect any of the other paragraphs either.
So, the effective notice definition is the part referred to by paragraph (i) in section 46.035. You receive the effective notice when the sign is properly posted. Then you get charged with violating 46.035 and not 30.06.
The fun part is that if it were a private hospital, you could get charged with both violations for carrying past the same sign.
I respectfully disagree. 2 Parts.
First, regarding your application of (e) to the rest of the statute.
Section (e) pertains to the
entirety of 30.06. It specifically states it is an exception to the '
application of this section', eg, everything between the
§ (section) symbols, eg all of 30.06.
So (b) is excepted if (e) is met. Which means, there is no longer any definition that meets 'effective notice' under that section. The application of the Text as defined in (b) is excepted/no longer construes/can no longer be applied as 'effective notice'. Noting the circular logic above, in order for one to affect the other, one has to be true at one point in time for the logic to return true. If A, than B, and If B, than A, will not return true if neither B nor A are never true.
Then to 46.035 only referring to the 'definition' of 'effective notice'
I agree that 'effective notice' is defined under (b), however, 46.035 does not say 'effective notice
As Defined in 30.06', but rather, 'effective notice
Under 30.06'. This means that 30.06 has to apply,
on it's standalone, before it can be applied to 46.035. You yourself have said that 30.06 will not apply on it's own, so therefore, since they were not given 'effective notice under 30.06', it does not apply.
At least this is my opinion.
How a judge or a jury would see it could be completely different from both of our interpretations
