Robles in a threatening or harassing manner, or engaging in conduct directed at her that is reasonably likely to harass, annoy, alarm, abuse, torment, or embarrass. Relevant here, it prohibited Appellant from communicating directly with Ms. The hearing resulted in what is denominated as an agreed protective order dated May 2, 2012. Appellant appeared at the hearing on the application without counsel. She filed an application for a protective order in the 65th District Court following an alleged altercation after their break-up. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND Appellant is Laura Robles’s ex-boyfriend. Additionally, Appellant claims that the statute under which he was convicted violates his First Amendment rights to free speech. The predominant theme of this appeal is that the protective order was void, and that a person cannot be criminally responsible for violating a void order. (TC # 20130C07785) § OPINION Appellant was convicted of the Class A misdemeanor offense of violating a protective order.
4 § THE STATE OF TEXAS, of El Paso County, Texas § Appellee.
COURT OF APPEALS EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS EL PASO, TEXAS § SERGIO PEREZ, No.
0 kommentar(er)
