TexasCHLforum.com

E.Marquez wrote:

JP171 wrote:

C-dub wrote:

E.Marquez wrote:

C-dub wrote:So, does this mean that the intoxication charge was also dropped? I didn't even see it mentioned. We knew the charge regarding carrying in the hospital was dropped.

I heard from mr glass tonight,

All charges dropped

That is excellent news. I hope his status in the Army is unaffected and he is returned to his former duties ASAP.

unfortunatly thats not gonna happen, he already has a counseling letter at the least in his 201 file and his CO has probably put notes in his restricted file that blew his career to bits

Umm, no,

1st, a DA4856 developmental counseling form is a local document only, and is destroyed upon transferring units.
2nd, there is no such thing as a 201 file any longer, personal records are digital and counseling forms have not been placed In a personal record for more then 30 years now.
3rd, this should effect him no more then a closed case with no conviction might effect a person applying for a chl.. You have to disclose it, on say a security clearance application, but not a big deal. No one else will ever know in a future unit unless he tells them.

The lasting effects of this event are personal (financial) in nature. Not professional.

C-dub wrote:

E.Marquez wrote:

C-dub wrote:So, does this mean that the intoxication charge was also dropped? I didn't even see it mentioned. We knew the charge regarding carrying in the hospital was dropped.

I heard from mr glass tonight,

All charges dropped

That is excellent news. I hope his status in the Army is unaffected and he is returned to his former duties ASAP.

bronco78 wrote:My meeting with the lawyer has been moved to Monday.. so no first hand recounted news till then.
Of note, I was told a actual copy of the police report was not allowed to be given to me by the defense lawyer. Under the rules of discovery, the DA has to give it to the defense, but there is an agreement that it can not be further passed on.. HOWEVER I will be allowed to read it.
I also will hear the 911 call that started this event (Mr Sampson's call for help for his wife)

I know one question is... whats is in the report reference alcohol intoxication.
Anything else?

bronco78 wrote:

SewTexas wrote:soooooo, the cop or "someone" is saying that the CHL holder has "allegedly" (always have hated that word, but I suppose it's correct to use here) carried their weapon into a 30.06 posted establishment? or somewhere else it's illegal to carry?

No The original charge WAS violation of violation of 46.065 Carrying a concealed hand gun in a hospital.. He was notified, arrested, charged and released on bail.

A plea bargain was offered on lesser charges, when Mr Sampson's lawyer pointed out to the ADA that no violation occurred due to the hospital not having complied with requirement to post 30.06 or verbally notify, neither of which were done..the charges were changed well after the night of the event to carrying while intoxicated.

The sole evidence presented in discover at this point is the accused admission he had had shared wine with is wife over a 6 hour period,, and the LEO stating he smelled alcohol on the accused breath.

jmra wrote:

C-dub wrote:

jmra wrote:

WildBill wrote:

Oldgringo wrote:Once the music stops and the smoke clears, I suspect that we're gonna' find this whole thing is about more than 2A rights and signage. The word "impaired" keeps floating around my head and that word is compounded by the phrase "judgementally impaired" as applied to Texas statutes.

Call me a wimp if you must but if I called the EMT's to the house because Mrs. Oldgringo had drank herself into a sick stupor, with my help, and the LEO told me not to take my piece to the hospital, I would have said', "thank you" and headed to the hospital. You?

You may be right. I don't even remember how the LEO knew about the gun at the house.

my guess would be the officer asked for ID and was given dl and chl.

Ooh, interesting side question. The soldier would have been at home when the officer responded to the original call and that's where he would have been asked for ID. So, am I required by law when asked for ID inside my home or on my property to inform or provide my CHL to the officer? I don't think I am, but it might be foolish not to.

I'm not saying he was required to, just betting that is what happened. I would also bet that there were a number of questions asked about guns in the home, where are they located, ...