Courthouse is off limits in its entirety

[CWOOD]

Some of us were at crossed purposes in the topic 'CUFFED AND STUFFED'. We were wandering off the main topic of the OP and discussing carrying in a courthouse instead. Thought it might be clearer and more respectful of the OP to just make it a seperate topic. I know it has been discussed elsewhere but seems to have not been resolved. Here is a recent post:..
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

by wgoforth » Sat Feb 13, 2010 7:40 pm

CWOOD, There has been disagreement in other threads as to whether it is the courtroom only or the entire courthouse, even when we are talking such things as a County Extension Office or Voters registration. Each seems to feel there is not question, but few seem willing to be the test case <g>. The problem seems to be that PC 46.03-06 says building or PORTION of building. So, is the court ONLY the portion in which the court itself is, or the entire building? If you would like to revisit that discussion, check out view topic...

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Here is a post in the thread which wgoforth referenced:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

by joe817 » Mon Dec 28, 2009 3:32 pm

It's actually in PC 46.03:

"Sec. 46.03. PLACES WEAPONS PROHIBITED. (a) A person commits an offense if the person intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly possesses or goes with a firearm, illegal knife, club, or prohibited weapon listed in Section 46.05(a):
(1)....
(2)....
(3) on the premises of any government court or offices utilized by the court, unless pursuant to written regulations or written authorization of the court...
.
.
.
(c) In this section:
(1) "Premises" has the meaning assigned by Section 46.035."

Going to 46.035:
"(3) "Premises" means a building or a portion of a building. The term does not include any public or private driveway, street, sidewalk or walkway, parking lot, parking garage, or other parking area."

So the entire courthouse is off limits for carry.

Hope that helps.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

joe817 has it exactly correct. The law was changed two legislative sessions ago to add the word premisis to PC 46.03. There was much discussion at the time that this would exclude the entire courthouse. By using the word 'premisis', just like in a school, it includes the entire building even if only a small portion of the building includes a court or offices of a court.

Don't let what we wish were the case cloud our judgement about what the plain English of the law in this case says. Would you think it is OK to carry in the the nurses office or the concession area of a school just because these are not classrooms? Of course not. It is all in the same premisis. Same with a courthouse. Just because you are at the tax office does not make it any less part of the premisis.

Perhaps some are thinking about how it ONCE was. You COULD go to the tax office while carrying, but when the word premisis was added with its definition, that part of our world change.

If it is posed as a selection between 'building' or 'portion of a building' what do you think the prosecutor will choose. Actually, it isn't a choice. The law includes BOTH. We don't get to choose.

Be careful out there.

Regards

[blue]

-------------------------------------------------------------
"'Paging Mr. Cotton to a white courtesy telephone " !! (Thank You in advance)
-------------------------------------------------------------

In some citys it is ONE BUILDING for everything - the courtrooms, visitors info, water dept., tax office, Driver license, etc., and the PUBLIC LIBRARY!!!!!!.
Thought that this was sorted out in Austin, a few years ago, that the court offices ONLY were off limits and that the Library etc., is OK to Carry. ?

Thank You to CWOOD and Joe817 for bring this up!

???????????,
Regards,
Blue

[davidtx]

-------------------------------------------------------------
"'Paging Mr. Cotton to a white courtesy telephone " !! (Thank You in advance)
-------------------------------------------------------------

In some citys it is ONE BUILDING for everything - the courtrooms, visitors info, water dept., tax office, Driver license, etc., and the PUBLIC LIBRARY!!!!!!.
Thought that this was sorted out in Austin, a few years ago, that the court offices ONLY were off limits and that the Library etc., is OK to Carry. ?

Thank You to CWOOD and Joe817 for bring this up!

???????????,
Regards,
Blue

It may have been, but as was pointed out above, it was changed two sessions ago so that the entire premises is off-limits.

[chabouk]

I appreciate that you've explained your position, and I understand how you arrived at it.

I disagree, and here's why:

46.03(a)(3) on the premises of any government court or offices utilized by the court,
46.035(3) "Premises" means a building or a portion of a building.

The use of "offices utilized by the court", and "portion of a building" makes it clear to me that the intent is to restrict the ban to only those areas used by a court.

The statutory definition of "premises" is not "a building", it is "a building or a portion of a building". Government offices are more and more frequently leasing commercial space. Let's suppose Bugtussle County is running a high-volume traffic court, and they've outgrown their space at the courthouse, plus, they want to increase the efficiency of their collection system, so they lease the fast food portion of the local truck stop on the highway, complete with handy drive-through window. If your opinion is correct, the entire truck stop building would be off limits: a traveler with no idea there were offices of the court within the building would violate 46.03(a)(3) when they popped in to get a cup of coffee.

Substitute "mall", "Wal-Mart", or "one commercial space in a large strip mall", and the outcome is the same.

I hold that the premises of a court is limited to the building or portion of a building actually utilized by the court. That is the logical, grammatical construction of the statute.

[sjfcontrol]

So
If it is posed as a selection between 'building' or 'portion of a building' what do you think the prosecutor will choose. Actually, it isn't a choice. The law includes BOTH. We don't get to choose.

I don't understand this statement. "Premises" is defined as "a building or portion of a building". (46.035(f)(3))
So are you saying that this is interpreted as meaning the entire building? If so, to what purpose is the phrase "or portion of". Why is it even there?

(chabouk beat me to it! And said it better, to boot! )

[wgoforth]

chabouk, that is exactly my take on it. if it is not the case, then the state has left a huge hole by saying "or portion of." Again, I do not want to be the test case, but the language is vague enough I can see how each side arrives at their conclusion. It does sound as though only the court and its offices to me... thus Extension Office, Voter Registration, etc would be permissible. I know most courthouse would tell you it is NOT permissible (we have metal detectors here) but that could just mean they misunderstand it and are excessive as the rest of our local gvt offices here are posted no guns as well.

Interestingly, I DIDN'T think one could legally carry in a courthouse UNTIL I read the codes concerning it. It is their definition of premises that makes me now think otherwise.

[Keith B]

I tend to agree with chabouk on this view. The areas used for the courts or offices of the courts would be the only portion of the building off limits. I truly believe this was the intent of the wording and the adding of 'portion of the building' when the change was made to the statutes.

And, most (not all, but most) court areas these days are in a secured portion of the building behind a metal detector or security check point, so pretty easy to tell where you can't carry as they will remove it from you if you try to pass through.

[roberts]

a building or a portion of a building

utilized by the court

[cougartex]

In Jefferson County (Beaumont, TX) it is the entire courthouse. The metal detectors are at the front door of the courthouse. Only way into the courthouse is through metal detectors.

[wgoforth]

Yes, Brownwood TX Courthouse has metal detectors inside the front door as well so I cannot carry. Do I believe they are following state guidelines on this? No. Just like they are not to say none at the water utility office in town. I obey because I must and not worth the hassle, but I do not believe they are correct in the matter.

[sjfcontrol]

Yes, Brownwood TX Courthouse has metal detectors inside the front door as well so I cannot carry. Do I believe they are following state guidelines on this? No. Just like they are not to say none at the water utility office in town. I obey because I must and not worth the hassle, but I do not believe they are correct in the matter.

Ummm, they aren't "guidelines", they're "LAWS".

And I don't understand what you're getting at with the water utility stuff.

[wgoforth]

I'm saying that in Brownwood even the local city water office (not in the courthouse) has a no carry sign. In fact, most city offices here do. My point is, yes, courthouses may have signs and metal detectors but that doesn't mean they are right any more than they are at our local water office who is equally wrong, See my point?

[couzin]

The Gregg County (Longview) courthouse had a detector/scanner set up at the entrances to the court rooms as of three years ago, the rest of the building (county clerk, tax assessor, etc) was unposted. Don't know if it has changed since we moved.

[sjfcontrol]

I'm saying that in Brownwood even the local city water office (not in the courthouse) has a no carry sign. In fact, most city offices here do. My point is, yes, courthouses may have signs and metal detectors but that doesn't mean they are right any more than they are at our local water office who is equally wrong, See my point?

Ah, Yes -- Thanks.

And city/state government is not supposed to be ABLE to 30.06 post.

[wgoforth]

No...they don't have a 30.06.... this is a Brownwood thing. The LEO's agree that a sign that says "No guns, legal or illegal" applies to everyone, CHL or no. The City and county have such signs, believing it applies. I'm not going to tell them otherwise, BUT I sure don't want to get made because I know I will do the ride. I was informed by the head Trooper that regardless of sign wording, the intent was clear... go figure.