Ex Parte Stuart Oland Wheeler, 478 S.W.3d 89

Wheeler indicted under Penal Code §33.021(c) for online solicitation of a minor.
Wheeler filed a pretrial habeas corpus challenging §§33.021(c)-(d) as unconstitutional.
Texas Court of Appeals applied Ex parte Lo to presume validity of §33.021(c).
Wheeler argued overbreadth, vagueness, and Dormant Commerce Clause defects against (c) and (d).
Court held §33.021(c) not unconstitutionally overbroad; interpreted (d) to preserve the required intent; rejected vagueness claim.
Court rejected Dormant Commerce Clause challenge under Pike balancing and affirmed trial court’s denial of habeas relief.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Is §33.021(c) overbroad?	Wheeler argues (c) broad enough to criminalize ageplay.	Wheeler should not receive leniency; statute targets conduct.	Not overbroad; statute valid.
Do §33.021(c) and (d)(2) conflict/vagueness?	(d)(2) eliminates the intent element, creating conflict.	Interpretation preserves intent requirement at solicitation.	Not contradictory; (d)(2) refers to post-solicitation intent.
Is §33.021(d)(3) overbroad?	(d)(3) precludes ageplay defense, overbroad.	Overbreadth outweighed by legitimate aims.	Not overbroad.
Does §33.021 violate Dormant Commerce Clause?	Regulates internet nationwide; burden on interstate commerce.	Regulates conduct; incidental interstate impact permissible.	Not unduly burdensome; Pike balanced; constitutional.

Ex parte Lo, 424 S.W.3d 10 (Tex. Crim. App. 2013) (overbreadth challenge to section 33.021(b) invalidated; informs validity of (c) decisions)
New York v. Ferber, 458 U.S. 747 (U.S. Supreme Court 1982) (overbreadth and child-protection framework for speech-related statutes)
Broadrick v. Oklahoma, 413 U.S. 601 (U.S. Supreme Court 1973) (overbreadth judicial restraint doctrine)
Pike v. Bruce Church, Inc., 397 U.S. 137 (U.S. Supreme Court 1970) (balancing test for state regulation vs. interstate commerce impact)