Here's the problem:

In 2011 the Leg changed evading up a bit.

Under ch. 391 sec 1: state jail if used a car and not previously convicted.

Under ch. 920 sec. 3: third degree felony if used a car.

Both have the same effective date.
The conflict is not addressed (or at least I don't see where it is addressed).

So, is the argument that the legislature intended a third degree because it passed the bill later?

Thoughts?
Have y'all seen something like this before?

This question has come up multiple times since these bills went into effect. Our interpretation is that because the bills were passed without reference to the other, they can be harmonized so that all are given effect. See Gov't Code 311.025(b).

SB 496 (ch. 391) was passed to add the use of a watercraft while evading to the punishment enhancements in 38.04(b).

SB 1416 (ch. 920) is the only bill that amended the punishment for evading while using a vehicle.

It's a 3rd degree felony to evade arrest or detention using a vehicle or watercraft, regardless of whether the actor has been previously convicted under this section.

Page 107 of the 2011 Criminal Laws of Texas has sorted out all the changes to this section.

We totally didn't see that note.

Thanks.

quote:

---

Originally posted by rk:
The conflict is not addressed (or at least I don't see where it is addressed).

...

Have y'all seen something like this before?

---

Yes, this happens frequently, but don't feel bad. The Legislature passes "conflicting" laws like this every session, but rarely in regard to punishments, so harmonizing changes like this is not something the courts have to do very often.

I say "conflicting" because, legally, they do not conflict. A conflict only occurs when CHANGED language in one bill contradicts CHANGED language in another bill. As long as the strikethrough/underline changes in the two bills are not in irreconcilable conflict, then both bills can be harmonized and given effect.

And the evading issue arises again.

Has anyone done a brief or a reply to a motion or something to that effect on this issue?

We've explained the law, but now they want it in writing. Before I create the wheel, I thought I'd check in here first.

More on this issue, for anyone still wrestling with it ...

https://tdcaa.infopop.net/eve/f...7098965/m/7307011806