Posted: Fri Mar 09, 2007 9:03 pm
OK I'll go along with that.KBCraig wrote:ElGato wrote:I respectfuly disagree with your instructor, I think the five requirement's for the presumption made it perfectly clear.TIN BENDER wrote: My CHL instructor believes that THE TRAVELER has never been defined in our TEXAS SYSTEM. I'm sure we all can find that GRAY Area Here. I'll hire a lawyer if ever needed. Hope not.
Thank all of you.
The instructor might not be right, but he's technically correct. "Travel/er/ing" is still not defined in the penal code, although there are a listed combination of circumstances under which one is presumed to be traveling.
A definition would have made things much simpler.
Kevin