Ex Parte Derek Ty Poe

LEANNE JOHNSON; Justice,

concurring.

In this pretrial habeas proceeding, Poe challenges section 42.01(a)(8)1 of the disorderly conduct statute and argues -that the statute is facially unconstitutional and unconstitutionally vague. I agree with the majority’s conclusion to overrule Poe’s facial constitutional challenges and his challenge that, the -statute is unconstitutionally vague. I write separately from the majority to- clarify the basis for my conclusion that Poe has failed to meet his heavy burden to establish-a facial challenge to the statute.

Facial Constitutional Challenges

A defendant…