Principal Office
15110 Dallas Pkwy #400
Dallas, TX 75248
(972) 233-5700
15110 Dallas Pkwy #400
Dallas, TX 75248
(972) 233-5700
Years Defending Texans
Cases Dismissed
Criminal Cases Handled
Counties Served Across Texas
Available | Serving All of Texas
A single conversation that takes you into custody requires a fair review of your case. Online solicitation charges in Texas carry felony exposure starting at two years in prison and mandatory sex offender registration upon conviction.
A Texas online solicitation of a minor lawyer can help you understand exactly what you’re facing and what comes next. The Law Offices of Richard C. McConathy provide 24/7 access to Richard McConathy directly, not a rotating team of paralegals. Our offices have handled more than 6,000 criminal cases and 1,000 dismissals statewide.
Call (972) 233-5700 to have your case evaluated.
Our firm gives every online solicitation client personalized attention and direct access to Richard McConathy from the very first phone call. These cases almost always hinge on specific chat logs and text messages; our firm reviews your case individually before moving forward.
The Law Offices of Richard C. McConathy have represented clients in more than 6,000 criminal cases and secured over 1,000 case dismissals throughout Dallas, Collin, Denton, and Tarrant Counties, along with clients statewide. That experience shapes how the firm evaluates sting operation evidence, since most online solicitation arrests in Texas come from undercover law enforcement rather than an actual minor.
The firm’s related work defending clients accused of child sexual abuse offenses informs how solicitation cases get handled from intake through trial. Clients reach the firm 24 hours a day, seven days a week, since these arrests frequently happen unexpectedly at a meeting location set up during a sting.
Online solicitation of a minor under Texas law covers two separate types of conduct defined in Tex. Penal Code § 33.021. Both involve using electronic communication, but they carry different elements and different felony levels.
Subsection (b) criminalizes sending sexually explicit communication or material to a minor over the internet, text message, or other electronic service. Subsection (c) criminalizes soliciting a minor to meet, using the internet or electronic messaging, with intent that sexual contact will occur.
A charge under subsection (c) does not require that the meeting actually took place. The statute specifically states that whether the meeting occurred is not a defense, which means an arrest can happen the moment someone travels to an agreed location.
Offense Type | Governing Subsection | Felony Level | Prison Range |
Sexually explicit communication with a minor 14 or older | Tex. Penal Code § 33.021(b) | Third-degree felony | 2 to 10 years |
Sexually explicit communication with a minor under 14 | Tex. Penal Code § 33.021(b) | Second-degree felony | 2 to 20 years |
Soliciting a minor to meet for sexual contact | Tex. Penal Code § 33.021(c) | Second-degree felony | 2 to 20 years |
Any offense committed during school hours with knowledge of minor status | Tex. Penal Code § 33.021(f-1) | Enhanced by one felony degree | Varies by base offense |
No, Texas law allows prosecution even when the alleged minor was an undercover officer or a fictional persona created by law enforcement. This is why the vast majority of online solicitation cases in Texas begin with a sting operation rather than an actual child.
Understanding how these operations work matters for building a defense.
These chat logs become the entire case in most sting-based prosecutions. Reviewing exactly who initiated each part of the conversation and what the defendant actually believed about the other person’s age often determines how a defense gets built.
Several defense strategies apply to online solicitation charges, and the right one depends heavily on how the specific conversation unfolded. The statute itself recognizes only two affirmative defenses, but other defense arguments exist outside the statute as well.
Defense approaches the firm evaluates in these cases include the following.
Each of these defenses requires specific evidence from the chat logs, messages, or circumstances of the arrest. The firm reviews the full communication history before recommending which defense actually fits a given case.
Yes, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals struck down the original version of subsection (b) in 2013, finding it unconstitutionally overbroad under the First Amendment. The Texas Legislature rewrote the statute in 2015 to address that ruling, and the current version has withstood further constitutional challenges since then.
This history matters because older cases charged under the original statute may carry different legal considerations than cases charged under the current law. The firm reviews when the alleged conduct occurred and which version of the statute applies before building a defense strategy.
An online solicitation arrest in Texas typically moves through booking, arraignment, and a review of digital communication evidence before the case reaches trial or a negotiated resolution. Each stage creates a specific opportunity to challenge the state’s case.
Getting an attorney involved early gives the accused more control over how the case develops.
The earliest days after an arrest often determine what options remain available later. Evidence tied to a specific conversation is strongest and most reviewable right after the arrest occurs.
Yes, the firm answers calls 24 hours a day, seven days a week, since these arrests often happen at unexpected times and locations. Reaching out right away gives the firm the chance to review the chat logs before the state's narrative takes hold.
Clients work directly with Richard McConathy personally throughout their case, not a rotating team of junior staff. That direct access holds across the firm's full history of more than 6,000 criminal cases handled statewide.
Yes, the firm has secured more than 1,000 case dismissals across Dallas, Collin, Denton, and Tarrant Counties, including cases built on undercover sting evidence. That experience shapes how the firm reviews chat logs, timestamps, and officer conduct from the start.
This distinction matters differently depending on whether law enforcement or a private individual was involved, and it affects which defenses apply. Reviewing exactly who initiated the deception and what the accused believed is central to building a response.
Yes, both subsections of Tex. Penal Code § 33.021 carry felony penalties, starting at the third-degree level and reaching second-degree depending on the minor's age or the type of conduct alleged.
Sometimes, when law enforcement induces conduct the accused would not have engaged in without that inducement. Entrapment defenses depend heavily on who initiated the sexually explicit content and how the conversation escalated.
Yes, any conviction or deferred adjudication under Section 33.021 requires sex offender registration under Texas law. This applies regardless of whether the case involved an actual minor or an undercover officer.
Yes, the platform where the conversation occurred does not determine whether the statute applies. What matters is the content of the communication and what the accused knew or believed about the other person's age.
Online solicitation offenses generally follow standard felony statute of limitations periods in Texas, though the specific timeline depends on how the charge gets classified. Reviewing the timeline of the alleged offense with an attorney clarifies what deadlines actually apply.
The Law Offices of Richard C. McConathy provide 24/7 access to Richard McConathy directly, backed by a case history of more than 6,000 criminal matters and over 1,000 dismissals. Call (972) 233-5700 to speak with our offices.
Whether you're facing a felony charge or fighting a traffic ticket, every case deserves serious attention. Get an experienced defense team in your corner now.
