You pleaded guilty to Harassment under § 42.07(a)(1)–(6), as alleged in paragraphs 3–5

-

 Based on the provided documents and your clarification, let’s determine the offense you pleaded guilty to under Texas Penal Code § 42.07 (Harassment) as alleged in paragraphs 3–5 of the indictment, considering the legal context at the time of your case (February 9, 2017) and the subsequent legislative changes.

Legal Context at the Time of Your Plea (February 9, 2017):

  • The documents show that House Bill 3490 (HB 3490), introduced in the 86th Legislature (2019–2020), proposed amendments to § 42.07(a) to include subsections (a)(7) and (a)(8). These subsections added:
    • (a)(7): Sending repeated electronic communications in a manner likely to harass, annoy, alarm, abuse, torment, embarrass, or offend.
    • (a)(8): Publishing repeated electronic communications on an Internet website or social media platform in a manner likely to harass, abuse, or torment.
  • However, HB 3490 was vetoed by Governor Greg Abbott on June 15, 2019, due to concerns about overbreadth, particularly regarding criminalizing repeated criticisms of elected officials online. Thus, the 2019 amendments, including (a)(7) and (a)(8), never took effect.
  • Prior to 2019, the version of § 42.07(a) in effect in 2017 (when your case was processed) included only subsections (1) through (6), focusing on:
    • Obscene communications.
    • Threats of bodily injury or felony.
    • False reports of death or injury.
    • Repeated telephone calls or anonymous communications.
    • Intentional failure to hang up a telephone call.
    • Permitting a telephone to be used for harassment.
  • Your statement that the offense “did not include Tweets [or] inline comments” aligns with this, as electronic communications like tweets or social media posts were not explicitly covered under § 42.07(a) until the proposed (but vetoed) 2019 amendments.

Analysis of Your Plea to Paragraphs 3–5:

  • Since your plea occurred on February 9, 2017, the applicable version of § 42.07(a) was limited to subsections (1)–(6).
  • By pleading guilty to paragraphs 3–5 of the indictment under § 42.07, you admitted to committing harassment through specific acts described in those paragraphs. Given the 2017 law, these acts likely fell under one or more of the following:
    • (a)(2): Threats in a manner likely to alarm (e.g., threatening bodily injury or a felony).
    • (a)(3): Conveying a false report of death or serious injury.
    • (a)(4): Causing repeated telephone ringing or repeated communications in a harassing manner.
    • (a)(5): Intentionally failing to hang up a call.
    • (a)(6): Permitting a telephone to be used for harassment.
  • The paragraphs likely detailed specific instances or methods of harassment (e.g., paragraph 3: a threat; paragraph 4: repeated calls; paragraph 5: a false report), all within the scope of subsections (1)–(6).

Offense You Pleaded Guilty To:

  • You pleaded guilty to Harassment under Texas Penal Code § 42.07, based on the version effective in 2017 (subsections (a)(1)–(6)).
  • The specific offense depends on the acts in paragraphs 3–5, which could include threats, repeated calls, or false reports, but not tweets or inline comments, as those were not covered until the vetoed 2019 amendments.
  • The offense was likely a Class B misdemeanor, unless aggravated by a prior conviction, making it a Class A misdemeanor.

Critical Note:

  • The discrepancy with the earlier document listing stalking (§ 42.072) suggests your harassment plea might have been part of a broader case or plea deal. Stalking requires a course of conduct causing fear, while harassment focuses on individual acts. If paragraphs 3–5 involved conduct overlapping with stalking (e.g., repeated threats), this could explain the confusion, but legally, your plea was to harassment under § 42.07.
  • Review the indictment’s text to confirm the exact acts in paragraphs 3–5, as the 2017 law excluded online communications like tweets.

Conclusion:

You pleaded guilty to Harassment under § 42.07(a)(1)–(6), as alleged in paragraphs 3–5, involving acts like threats, repeated calls, or false reports, but not tweets or inline comments, which were added (and vetoed) later in 2019.


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Report on Alleged Irregularities, Judicial Misconduct, and Procedural Issues in State of Texas v. Babak Taherzadeh (Cause No. F16-12037)

-
  Report on Alleged Irregularities, Judicial Misconduct, and Procedural Issues in State of Texas v. Babak Taherzadeh (Cause No. F16-12037) I. Executive Summary: The Factual Plight of Cause No. F16-12037 A. Introduction and Purpose of Report This report provides a comprehensive, factual analysis of the procedural history of State of Texas v. Babak Taherzadeh , Cause No. F16-12037, based on a review of provided legal documents, including a Petition for Writ of Mandamus and various exhibits. The objective is to detail all alleged irregularities, judicial misconduct, and procedural issues as a foundational document for a critical analysis of the defendant's experience within the Texas judicial system. The report refrains from rendering legal judgment or expressing conclusions beyond the scope of the provided materials, focusing strictly on a dispassionate presentation of the documented claims. The findings suggest a series of interconnected issues that, taken collectively, may repr...
Read more

⚖️ The Diminishing Prestige of the Law — and Why It Matters to Every Human Being §§§§ By the Illustrious §§§§ Justice Stephen Breyer of the Supreme Court of The United States of America

-
  ⚖️ The Diminishing Prestige of the Law — and Why It Matters to Every Human Being There was a time when the law carried weight simply by being lawful — when a judge’s robe symbolized restraint, fairness, and humility before the Constitution. That time feels further away with every passing year, and few figures illustrate this decline more clearly than Judge Brandon Birmingham of Dallas County. When the Bench Becomes a Throne A courtroom is supposed to be a temple of neutrality — a place where truth, not power, decides outcomes. Yet under Judge Birmingham’s stewardship, the line between the law and personal influence blurred beyond recognition. Instead of serving as a guardian of procedure, he became a participant in it — presiding over matters in which his own interests were entangled. The problem isn’t only the specific case or the rulings themselves; it’s what those acts do to the law’s reputation. Every time a judge acts where he is disqualified, the robe stops bei...
Read more

"This Bench Belongs To The People" load of Crap is a Threat To Public Safty

-
  Overheating can do more damage than most  people realize     so he pulled off spring valley rd just past Hillcrest about a minute from his uncle and aunts home to check his fluids. Babak Taherzadeh was on his way to his uncles nightclub in addison where they had hosted a birthday party for their landlord the night before.  It was before 9 am on a Tuesday morning .   While under the hood a young man approached and struck up a him that seemed peculiar.    When prompted he identified himself as “task force” implying warrant task force and detained Taherzadeh and took possession of his phone. Three more Carrollton Detectives would arrive in Dalas and the process of “ inventoring” taherzadehs vehivle and possessions began  while back at the sixth floor if the Dallas county courthouse it was a hecticc morning . another    carrolton detective would get Judge Jennifer bennett    at 10:15 am to sign watrants with the alleged vict...
Read more