This may surprise you, but I'm thinking...

[ShysterJon]

Thank you, Little Stevie. I appreciate your kind words.

It was a close call, but I've decided to start writing here again. It was either that or run against Greg Abbott (in a race for Texas Attorney General, not a footrace -- haha).

Now I need to decide what my first meaty post should be about. I promised some knucklehead awhile back I'd write about how to choose a lawyer. But if someone else has a more pressing need for advice, I'm all ears, especially if it's HOBBY-RELATED. Note: Child custody battles are not really hobby-related, unless a John is the baby daddy.

[Little Stevie]

Before you settle down to write another useful constitutional rights piece, I'd like to hear more on any anonymous plans to throw large sticks and other impediments into the spokes of certain wheelchairs. Ha Ha

Welcome back!

[Guest120113]

Originally Posted by ShysterJon

Now I need to decide what my first meaty post should be about. I promised some knucklehead awhile back I'd write about how to choose a lawyer. But if someone else has a more pressing need for advice, I'm all ears, especially if it's HOBBY-RELATED. Note: Child custody battles are not really hobby-related, unless a John is the baby daddy.

LMAO!

I have an idea... a meaty, pressing post aimed at the provider community imploring them to do their basic legal homework BEFORE undertaking a career as a criminal...

Or perhaps teaching us how to choose a lawyer would be easier...

Decisions... Decisions.

[UB9IB6]

Good to see you around SJ. Been a bit.

Come kick some litter in the Ntl. shit box.
We could use some levity over there.

[ShysterJon]

Originally Posted by Ginger Lovelace

LMAO!

I have an idea... a meaty, pressing post aimed at the provider community imploring them to do their basic legal homework BEFORE undertaking a career as a criminal...

Or perhaps teaching us how to choose a lawyer would be easier...

Decisions... Decisions.

Reading the following thread would be a good start for any girl or boy pondering whether to play in Hobby World, although the author's rep may be suspect:

"Fundamentals of Texas Prostitution Law"

[Guest120113]

[QUOTE=ShysterJon;1052429526]Reading the following thread would be a good start for any girl or boy pondering whether to play in Hobby World, although the author's rep may be suspect:

[url=http://www.eccie.net/showthread.php?t=212302][B]"Fundamentals of Texas Prostitution Law"

Read it before I knew who you were lol. The underworld is a confusing place to dwell. Basic knowledge and the shut the fuck up claus go along way so I hope more reading and less asking after the fact will come from this sticky.

[JohnnyCap]

I appreciated hearing from you. More helpful than you can know.

[Boltfan]

I need to go commit a crime so I can utilize that hour of advice I have booked with you.

And people say pre-paying hookers is a bad idea.

Nice to see you back SJ.

[oden]

Question regarding tracking devices(welcome back John). If someone uses your cellphone to track you, SO, LE, anyone, is there legal recourse? If a tracking device of any kind is used without a warrant, is the information not only inadmissible but subject to recourse?

[ShysterJon]

Originally Posted by oden

Question regarding tracking devices(welcome back John). If someone uses your cellphone to track you, SO, LE, anyone, is there legal recourse? If a tracking device of any kind is used without a warrant, is the information not only inadmissible but subject to recourse?

Your question is a little confusing because it blends together two completely different things:

1. A person (like a suspicious wife) may install software on another person's cell phone to track their movements. As far as I know, to do so would not violate any Texas state law. I express no opinion on federal law.

2. The police don't install software on a person's phone to track them - they get records from the person's cell service provider. Currently, police in Texas must have “reasonable suspicion” to get a court order to obtain cellphone company records. That's a very low standard. And any civil litigator, prosecutor, or defense attorney will tell you that cell companies regularly release customer records when they get a subpoena. In Texas, all that's required for the issuance of a subpoena is an attorney's signature. There's a bill in the state legislature that, if passed, would raise the bar for the police to get a court order to “probable cause.”

[Capt. Lincoln F. Stern]

I have a question... what are the limits if any on a person testifying against their spouse in court if their marriage is common law marriage?

[ShysterJon]

Originally Posted by Spirit13

I have a question... what are the limits if any on a person testifying against their spouse in court if their marriage is common law marriage?

First, let's talk about what's required to prove up a common law marriage in Texas (not to be confused with a commoner marriage, which is any marriage in Oklahoma).

As an aside, there are, simply put, two types of laws: statutory laws (that is, laws passed by representative bodies and published in law books) and "the common law" (that is, laws created out of thin air by self-important judges with black robe disease and published in books of decisions by courts of appeals).

If you're still awake, let us proceed...

Although Texas recognizes what's popularly-known as 'common law' marriages, the proper term is 'informal' marriage, and rather than the elements of proof thereof being set by judges, the elements are in a statute:

TEXAS FAMILY CODE SECTION 2.401. PROOF OF INFORMAL MARRIAGE

(a) In a judicial, administrative, or other proceeding, the marriage of a man and woman may be proved by evidence that:
(1) a declaration of their marriage has been signed as provided by this subchapter; or
(2) the man and woman agreed to be married and after the agreement they lived together in this state as husband and wife and there represented to others that they were married.
(b) If a proceeding in which a marriage is to be proved as provided by Subsection (a)(2) is not commenced before the second anniversary of the date on which the parties separated and ceased living together, it is rebuttably presumed that the parties did not enter into an agreement to be married.
(c) A person under 18 years of age may not:
(1) be a party to an informal marriage; or
(2) execute a declaration of informal marriage under Section 2.402.
(d) A person may not be a party to an informal marriage or execute a declaration of an informal marriage if the person is presently married to a person who is not the other party to the informal marriage or declaration of an informal marriage, as applicable.
(e) For protection of the species, LazarusLong may not enter into an informal marriage, or any other type of marriage.

See Texas Family Code § 2.401.

Assuming an informal marriage has been established, the same rules apply regarding spousal testimony as for formal marriages (that is, marriages with a certificate, ceremony, flowers, and hookers at the bachelor party). Spousal testimony in Texas state courts is governed by the following rule:

TEXAS RULE OF EVIDENCE 504. HUSBAND-WIFE PRIVILEGES

(a) Confidential Communication Privilege.

(1) Definition. A communication is confidential if it is made privately by any person to the person's spouse and it is not intended for disclosure to any other person.
(2) Rule of privilege. A person, whether or not a party, or the guardian or representative of an incompetent or deceased person, has a privilege during marriage and afterwards to refuse to disclose and to prevent another from disclosing a confidential communication made to the person's spouse while they were married.
(3) Who may claim the privilege. The confidential communication privilege may be claimed by the person or the person's guardian or representative, or by the spouse on the person's behalf. The authority of the spouse to do so is presumed.
(4) Exceptions. There is no confidential communication privilege:
(A) Furtherance of crime or fraud. If the communication was made, in whole or in part, to enable or aid anyone to commit or plan to commit a crime or fraud.
(B) Proceeding between spouses in civil cases. In (A) a proceeding brought by or on behalf of one spouse against the other spouse, or (B) a proceeding between a surviving spouse and a person who claims through the deceased spouse, regardless of whether the claim is by testate or intestate succession or by inter vivos transaction.
(C) Crime against spouse or minor child. In a proceeding in which the party is accused of conduct which, if proved, is a crime against the person of the spouse, any minor child, or any member of the household of either spouse, or, in a criminal proceeding, when the offense charged is under Section 25.01 Penal Code (Bigamy).
(D) Commitment or similar proceeding. In a proceeding to commit either spouse or otherwise to place that person or that person's property, or both, under the control of another because of an alleged mental or physical condition.
(E) Proceeding to establish competence. In a proceeding brought by or on behalf of either spouse to establish competence.

(b) Privilege not to Testify in Criminal Case.

(1) Rule of privilege. In a criminal case, the spouse of the accused has a privilege not to be called as a witness for the state. This rule does not prohibit the spouse from testifying voluntarily for the state, even over objection by the accused. A spouse who testifies on behalf of an accused is subject to cross-examination as provided in rule 611(b).
(2) Failure to call as witness. Failure by an accused to call the accused's spouse as a witness, where other evidence indicates that the spouse could testify to relevant matters, is a proper subject of comment by counsel.
(3) Who may claim the privilege. The privilege not to testify may be claimed by the person or the person's guardian or representative but not by that person's spouse.
(4) Exceptions. The privilege of a person's spouse not to be called as a witness for the state does not apply:
(A) Certain criminal proceedings. In any proceeding in which the person is charged with a crime against the person's spouse, a member of the household of either spouse, or any minor, or in an offense charged under Section 25.01, Penal Code (Bigamy).
(B) Matters occurring prior to marriage. As to matters occurring prior to the marriage.

Notes and Comments

Comment to 1997 change: The rule eliminates the spousal testimonial privilege for prosecutions in which the testifying spouse is the alleged victim of a crime by the accused. This is intended to be consistent with Code of Criminal Procedure article 38.10, effective September 1, 1995.

See Texas Rule of Evidence 504.

[Capt. Lincoln F. Stern]

Ok.. read all that and what I am trying to figure out for a friend who was charged with a drug related crime with his "informal marriage" wife is can the prosecutor try to get him to testify against her or vise versa? He took a deal and part of the deal is he is not to have any contact with the parties involved in the bust, which was he, his "informal marriage" wife and a friend... he lives with his wife so would not the court order to not have contact with her be void?

There are some other factors that might screw him over and I am trying him to research this since chance favors the prepared mind.

[PhantomofTheOpera]

^^^^ Re-read what ShysterJon posted because you missed key non-point. funny... very funny Shyster!

[ShysterJon]

Originally Posted by Spirit13

Ok.. read all that and what I am trying to figure out for a friend who was charged with a drug related crime with his "informal marriage" wife is can the prosecutor try to get him to testify against her or vise versa? He took a deal and part of the deal is he is not to have any contact with the parties involved in the bust, which was he, his "informal marriage" wife and a friend... he lives with his wife so would not the court order to not have contact with her be void?

There are some other factors that might screw him over and I am trying him to research this since chance favors the prepared mind.

Before I attempt to answer your questions, I should note that my first answer was incomplete because it could be read as being limited to the circumstance of H testifying against W regarding W's communications to H only. Of course, there are other matters H could testify to, such as what he saw W do.

You ask: CAN the prosecutor try to compel testimony from H against W? Why, sure! The prosecutor can try to compel testimony from H, you, me, Santa Claus, Crazy Rand Paul, and each member of the Mormon Tabernacle Choir. But the real question, properly framed is: Assuming H, as part of his plea bargain, did not agree to testify against W, can the state compel H to testify against W? My answer is 'no.' Under TRE 804(b)(1) (above), "the spouse of the accused has a privilege not to be called as a witness for the state." Obviously, the same rule would apply to an attempt by the prosecutor to compel W to testify against H (although you said his case has been disposed, so W testifying isn't possible).

You also ask about a term in the judgment barring H from having contact with W. No, that term isn't void because H and W live together -- in fact, H is violating the judgment by living with W. H should ask his lawyer to ask the judge to modify the judgment to exclude W from the non-contact provision.