So TPC 3.03(a)(2)(A) says we can stack convictions for offenses:
"(A) under Section 33.021 or an offense under Section 21.02, 21.11, 22.011, 22.021, 25.02, or 43.25 committed against a victim younger than 17 years of age at the time of the commission of the offense regardless of whether the accused is convicted of violations of the same section more than once or is convicted of violations of more than one section;"
33.021 is on-line solicitation. In our case, the "victim" was a cop. We're trying to decide if we can stack the sentences.
One theory is that everything after "or" does not apply to 33.021. The other is that even if it did, the nature of 33.021 is such that since you'd have to prove the actor believed the victim was younger than 17, that we're still okay to stack sentences.
Does anyone have any experience/ insight/ case law that sheds any light on this?
I hope I'm not giving too much credit to the legislature, but it makes sense that on-line solicitation is excluded from the requirements of rest of sec 3.03(b)(2)(A)'s sentence (theory 1) for the reason supporting theory 2: it would be redundant and confusing. Stacking in your case would also seem to fall within the spirit of the law as demonstrated by theory 2.
I think you're right that doesn't make sense to have the "or" there unless it's exempt. But you're also right that reading things to make sense doesn't really capture the legislative intent most of the time!
... says the guy who worked in the Capitol for a decade. How quickly they turn on their former masters!
Welcome to the forums, Mr. English.
Thank you, Shannon. I'm just happy to be here. Hope I can help the ball club. I just want to give it my best shot, and, good Lord willing, things will work out.
Well done, Meat.
|Powered by Social Strata|
© TDCAA, 2001. All Rights Reserved.