Legal Opinion · Dissent

Faulk v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Decided October 22, 1980No. 56402Published

1DissentClinton, Judge

The constitutional right of assembly, Article I, Section 27, Bill of Rights, is not limited to seeking governmental redress of grievances, and may not be unduly curtailed by state statute. De Jonge v. Oregon, 299 U.S. 353, 364-365, 57 S.Ct. 255, 260, 81 L.Ed. 278 (1937). V.T.C.A.Penal Code, § 42.02 creates the same “chilling effect” on assemblage that an overbroad statute does to exercise of right to free speech, Dombrowski v. Pfister, 380 U.S. 479, 487, 85 S.Ct. 1116, 1121, 14 L.Ed.2d 22 (1965). While assembling may be quite validly regulated where its participants harbor a forbidden intent,…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Dombrowski v. PfisterSupreme Court of the United States · 1965
  2. De Jonge v. OregonSupreme Court of the United States · 1937
  3. Geissler v. CoussoulisCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1967
  4. Lichten v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1968
  5. Lichten v. TexasSupreme Court of the United States · 1968

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API