Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
8 Texas opinions name it 2 courts 1912–2025 2 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Texas courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Smith v. Stategreen1 sentence2020Or, stated another way, “A person is justified in using deadly force in defense of others ‘[s]o long as the accused reasonably believes that the third person would be justified in using [deadly force] to protect himself.’” Braughton, 522 S.W.3d at 730 (alterations in original) (quoting Smith v. State, 355 S.W.3d 138, 145 (Tex. App.— Houston [1st Dist.] 2011, pet. ref’d)). 6 The use of force against another is not justified under a number of circumstances, including the following: when the use of force is in response to verbal provocation alone, if the actor provoked the other’s use or attempte | 1 | 1 |
Christopher Ernest Braughton v. Stategreen1 sentence2020Or, stated another way, “A person is justified in using deadly force in defense of others ‘[s]o long as the accused reasonably believes that the third person would be justified in using [deadly force] to protect himself.’” Braughton, 522 S.W.3d at 730 (alterations in original) (quoting Smith v. State, 355 S.W.3d 138, 145 (Tex. App.— Houston [1st Dist.] 2011, pet. ref’d)). 6 The use of force against another is not justified under a number of circumstances, including the following: when the use of force is in response to verbal provocation alone, if the actor provoked the other’s use or attempte | 1 | 1 |
Drago v. Stategreen1 sentence2011See Drago, 553 S.W.2d at 377 (officer had probable cause for a traffic stop even though the traffic signs in question could have been unconstitutionally vague and would not have afforded the defendant due process in a prosecution for violating the traffic law itself). 10 The State also contends that a jury instruction was unwarranted because appellant (1) was carrying a weapon in violation of Section 46.02 of the Penal Code; (2) provoked the disturbance as a matter of law; and (3) was committing a criminal trespass. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Texas. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Vasquez v. State
green
1 sentence2025(West 1995), but that exclusion did not exist when the conduct occurred, see Vasquez v. State, 796 S.W.2d 555 , (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 1990), rev’d, 830 S.W.2d 948 (events occurred on July 11, 1988), nor would it seem to have been implicated by the case facts. | 1 | 2025–2025 |
Vasquez v. State
green
1 sentence2025(West 1995), but that exclusion did not exist when the conduct occurred, see Vasquez v. State, 796 S.W.2d 555 , (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 1990), rev’d, 830 S.W.2d 948 (events occurred on July 11, 1988), nor would it seem to have been implicated by the case facts. | 1 | 2025–2025 |
Fink v. State
green
1 sentence2024See Guilbeau, 2009 WL 1086947 , at **4-5; Lee, 259 S.W.3d at 789 ; Fink, 97 S.W.3d at 744 . | 1 | 2024–2024 |
Lee v. State
green
1 sentence2024See Guilbeau, 2009 WL 1086947 , at **4-5; Lee, 259 S.W.3d at 789 ; Fink, 97 S.W.3d at 744 . | 1 | 2024–2024 |
Gamino, Cesar Alejandro
green
1 sentence2020“A trial court errs in denying a self defense instruction if there is some evidence, from any source, when viewed in the light most favorable to the defendant, that will support the elements of self defense.” Id. 15 However, “the use of force against another is not justified . . . if the actor sought an explanation from or discussion with the other person concerning the actor’s differences with the other person while the actor was carrying a weapon in violation of section 46.02.” TEX. | 1 | 2020–2020 |
Williams v. State
green
1 sentence2004See Tex. Pen.Code Ann. § 9.31(b)(5)(A) (Vernon 2003); Williams, 35 S.W.3d at 785 . | 1 | 2004–2004 |
Garcia v. State
green
1 sentence1983Cf. Worton v. State, 492 S.W.2d 519 (Tex.Cr.App.1973), with Garcia v. State, 528 S.W.2d 604 (Tex.Cr.App.1975).” We agree that to allow a defense of necessity whenever anyone “felt he was in a ‘high crime’ area,” as claimed by the defendant in Roy , would violate the intent of Sec. 46.02, supra. We do not agree, however, that such reasoning demonstrates a legislative purpose to exclude the defense of necessity under Sec. 9.22(3), supra. A feeling that one is in a “high crime” area would not constitute a reasonable belief that carrying a weapon in violation of Sec. 46.02 is immediately necessary | 1 | 1983–1983 |
Worton v. State
green
1 sentence1983Cf. Worton v. State, 492 S.W.2d 519 (Tex.Cr.App.1973), with Garcia v. State, 528 S.W.2d 604 (Tex.Cr.App.1975).” We agree that to allow a defense of necessity whenever anyone “felt he was in a ‘high crime’ area,” as claimed by the defendant in Roy , would violate the intent of Sec. 46.02, supra. We do not agree, however, that such reasoning demonstrates a legislative purpose to exclude the defense of necessity under Sec. 9.22(3), supra. A feeling that one is in a “high crime” area would not constitute a reasonable belief that carrying a weapon in violation of Sec. 46.02 is immediately necessary | 1 | 1983–1983 |
Hollifield v. Landrum
green
1 sentence1912Hollifield v. Landrum, 31 Tex. Civ. | 1 | 1912–1912 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.