imported post
Interesting ruling by the 5th Circuit:
Original URL:
http://www.5thcoa.courts.state.tx.us/cgi-bin/as_web.exe?c05topin.ask+D+402639
Opinion Filed May 22, 2008
Here is the part of the case dealing with disorderly conduct re firearm:
[align=left]"The State argues the officers had probable cause to believe
evidence of disorderly conduct would be found in appellant's apartment.
A person commits the offense of disorderly conduct if he displays a
firearm in a public place in a manner calculated to alarm. Tex. Penal
Code Ann. § 42.01(a)(8) (Vernon Supp. 2007). A “public place” is any
place to which the public or a substantial group of the public has
access, including common areas of apartment houses. See Tex. Penal Code
Ann. § 1.07(a)(40) (Vernon Supp. 2007). The record shows the
officers responded to a call about someone “displaying” a gun on a
balcony in a different building than appellant's apartment. Based on
“other descriptors and the conversation with the dispatcher,” the
officers determined the gun was displayed on appellant's balcony.
However, the record does not contain any facts regarding the “other
descriptors”, the conversation with the dispatcher, who saw the gun
displayed, the manner in which the gun was displayed, or whether the
balcony was in fact open to public view. Although the State maintains
the fact that someone called the police is sufficient to show the gun
was displayed in a way calculated to cause alarm, we cannot agree. The
mere fact that the police were called is not evidence of the way in
which the gun was displayed. Nor is the mere fact that a person saw a
gun “displayed” on a balcony evidence that the balcony was in a public
place. Without some evidence describing the balcony or the manner in
which the gun was displayed, we cannot conclude there were any facts or
circumstances showing the gun was displayed in a public place in a
manner calculated to alarm."[/align]
