Sec. 106.03. SALE TO MINORS. (a) A person commits an offense if with criminal negligence he sells an alcoholic beverage to a minor.
(b) A person who sells a minor an alcoholic beverage does not commit an offense if the minor falsely represents himself to be 21 years old or older by displaying an apparently valid proof of identification that contains a physical description and photograph consistent with the minor's appearance, purports to establish that the minor is 21 years of age or older, and was issued by a governmental agency. The proof of identification may include a driver's license or identification card issued by the Department of Public Safety, a passport, or a military identification card.
(c) An offense under this section is a Class A misdemeanor.
(d) Subsection (b) does not apply to a person who accesses electronically readable information under Section 109.61 that identifies a driver's license or identification certificate as invalid.
Acts 1977, 65th Leg., p. 513, ch. 194, Sec. 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1977. Amended by Acts 1981, 67th Leg., p. 257, ch. 107, Sec. 9, eff. Sept. 1, 1981; Acts 1983, 68th Leg., p. 2649, ch. 456, Sec. 4, eff. Sept. 1, 1983; Acts 1985, 69th Leg., ch. 285, Sec. 9, eff. Sept. 1, 1986; Acts 1985, 69th Leg., ch. 462, Sec. 10, eff. Sept. 1, 1986; Acts 1987, 70th Leg., ch. 582, Sec. 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1988; Acts 1997, 75th Leg., ch. 1013, Sec. 3, eff. Sept. 1, 1997.
Amended by:
Acts 2005, 79th Leg., Ch. 391 (S.B. 1465), Sec. 3, eff. September 1, 2005.
Acts 2009, 81st Leg., R.S., Ch. 488 (S.B. 693), Sec. 1, eff. June 19, 2009.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
17
cases (
1 in the last 5 years), 1987–2025 · leading case:
Ford v. State of Texas, 14 S.W.3d 382 (Tex. App. 2000).
Ford v. State of Texas, 14 S.W.3d 382 (Tex. App. 2000).
· cites it 5× “See Tex. Alco. Bev.Code Ann. § 106.03 (Vernon Supp.”
Phillips v. State, 161 S.W.3d 511 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005).
· cites it 4× “NOTES [1] TEX. ALCO. BEV.CODE § 106.03(a) (Vernon 2004).”
Boyd v. Fuel Distributors, Inc., 795 S.W.2d 266 (Tex. App. 1990).
· cites it 2× “Appellants argue in their third point of error that the trial court erroneously granted summary judgment precluding a common law cause of action based on the violation of Tex.Alco.Bev.Code Ann. § 106.03 because material fact issues exist as to whether with criminal neglect…”
Lively v. Carpet Servs., Inc., 904 S.W.2d 868 (Tex. App. 1995).
· cites it 2× “Austin 1990, writ denied) (refusing to adopt a standard of reasonable care for a breach of a duty pursuant to Tex.Alco.Bev.Code Ann. § 106.03 (Vernon Supp.”
Free Speech Coalition, Inc. v. Paxton, 606 U.S. 461 (2025).
“For example, Texas, like many States, requires proof of age to obtain alcohol, Tex. Alco. Bev. Code Ann. §106.03 (b) (2020); tobacco, Tex.”
Beard v. Graff, 801 S.W.2d 158 (Tex. App. 1990).
· cites it 2× “TEX.ALCO.BEV.CODE ANN. §§ 2.01-2.03 (Vernon Supp.”
Parker v. 20801, INC., 194 S.W.3d 556 (Tex. App. 2006).
“Tex. Alco. Bev.Code Ann. § 106.03(a) (Vernon 2005); Boyd, 795 S.”
Starr v. State, 734 S.W.2d 52 (Tex. App. 1987).
“ref’d), we held that Tex.Alco.Bev.Code Ann. section 106.03 (Vernon 1978), required proof that the defendant had actual knowledge of the purchaser’s minority.”
Phillips v. State, 109 S.W.3d 562 (Tex. App. 2003).
· cites it 2× “Tex. Alco. Bev.Code Ann. § 28.01 (Vernon 1995).”
— Tex. Alco. Bev. Code § 106.03(a) — 9 cases
Phillips v. State, 161 S.W.3d 511 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005).
“NOTES [1] TEX. ALCO. BEV.CODE § 106.03(a) (Vernon 2004).”
Boyd v. Fuel Distributors, Inc., 795 S.W.2d 266 (Tex. App. 1990).
“Appellants argue in their third point of error that the trial court erroneously granted summary judgment precluding a common law cause of action based on the violation of Tex.Alco.Bev.Code Ann. § 106.03 because material fact issues exist as to whether with criminal neglect…”
Parker v. 20801, INC., 194 S.W.3d 556 (Tex. App. 2006).
“Tex. Alco. Bev.Code Ann. § 106.03(a) (Vernon 2005); Boyd, 795 S.”
— Tex. Alco. Bev. Code § 106.03(b) — 2 cases
— Tex. Alco. Bev. Code § 106.03(c) — 1 case
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.