Texas Codes

Tex. Fam. Code § 85.025 (2026)

Duration Of Protective Order

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section TX-LEGstatutes.capitol.texas.gov Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Sec. 85.025. DURATION OF PROTECTIVE ORDER. (a) Except as otherwise provided by this section, an order under this subtitle is effective:

(1) for the period stated in the order, not to exceed two years; or

(2) if a period is not stated in the order, until the second anniversary of the date the order was issued.

(a-1) The court may render a protective order sufficient to protect the applicant and members of the applicant's family or household that is effective for a period that exceeds two years if the court finds that the person who is the subject of the protective order:

(1) committed an act constituting a felony offense involving family violence against the applicant or a member of the applicant's family or household, regardless of whether the person has been charged with or convicted of the offense;

(2) caused serious bodily injury to the applicant or a member of the applicant's family or household; or

(3) was the subject of two or more previous protective orders rendered:

(A) to protect the person on whose behalf the current protective order is sought; and

(B) after a finding by the court that the subject of the protective order has committed family violence.

(a-2) If an order under this subtitle is rendered against a respondent who is a party to a suit for dissolution of a marriage in which the applicant or a member of the applicant's family or household is the other party, the order is effective until the second anniversary of the date on which the final decree of dissolution of the marriage is approved and signed by the judge.

(a-3) If an order under this subtitle is rendered against a respondent who is a party to a suit affecting the parent-child relationship in which the applicant or a member of the applicant's family or household is also a party, the order is effective until the second anniversary of the date on which the final order in the suit is rendered by the court.

(a-4) If an order under this subtitle is rendered against a respondent who is charged with a criminal offense involving family violence under Title 5, Penal Code, or an offense under Section 25.11, Penal Code, the order is effective until the second anniversary of the date of the final disposition of the criminal case.

(b) A person who is the subject of a protective order may file a motion not earlier than the first anniversary of the date on which the order was rendered requesting that the court review the protective order and determine whether there is a continuing need for the order.

(b-1) Following the filing of a motion under Subsection (b), a person who is the subject of a protective order issued under Subsection (a-1), (a-2), (a-3), or (a-4) that is effective for a period that exceeds two years may file not more than one subsequent motion requesting that the court review the protective order and determine whether there is a continuing need for the order. The subsequent motion may not be filed earlier than the first anniversary of the date on which the court rendered an order on the previous motion by the person.

(b-2) After a hearing on a motion under Subsection (b) or (b-1), if the court does not make a finding that there is no continuing need for the protective order, the protective order remains in effect until the date the order expires under this section. Evidence of the movant's compliance with the protective order does not by itself support a finding by the court that there is no continuing need for the protective order. If the court finds there is no continuing need for the protective order, the court shall order that the protective order expires on a date set by the court.

(b-3) Subsection (b) does not apply to a protective order issued under Subchapter A, Chapter 7B, Code of Criminal Procedure.

(c) If a person who is the subject of a protective order is confined or imprisoned on the date the protective order would expire under Subsection (a), (a-1), (a-2), (a-3), or (a-4) or if the protective order would expire not later than the first anniversary of the date the person is released from confinement or imprisonment, the period for which the order is effective is extended, and the order expires on:

(1) the first anniversary of the date the person is released from confinement or imprisonment, if the person was sentenced to confinement or imprisonment for more than five years; or

(2) the second anniversary of the date the person is released from confinement or imprisonment, if the person was sentenced to confinement or imprisonment for five years or less.

(d) As soon as practicable after the release of a person who is the subject of a protective order from confinement or imprisonment, the Department of Public Safety shall update the statewide law enforcement information system maintained by the department to reflect the date that the order will expire following the person's release.

Added by Acts 1997, 75th Leg., ch. 34, Sec. 1, eff. May 5, 1997. Amended by Acts 1999, 76th Leg., ch. 1160, Sec. 3, eff. Sept. 1, 1999.

Amended by:

Acts 2011, 82nd Leg., R.S., Ch. 627 (S.B. 789), Sec. 2, eff. September 1, 2011.

Acts 2015, 84th Leg., R.S., Ch. 336 (H.B. 388), Sec. 1, eff. June 9, 2015.

Acts 2017, 85th Leg., R.S., Ch. 64 (S.B. 712), Sec. 1, eff. September 1, 2017.

Acts 2017, 85th Leg., R.S., Ch. 97 (S.B. 257), Sec. 1, eff. September 1, 2017.

Acts 2019, 86th Leg., R.S., Ch. 469 (H.B. 4173), Sec. 2.35, eff. January 1, 2021.

Acts 2023, 88th Leg., R.S., Ch. 688 (H.B. 1432), Sec. 5, eff. September 1, 2023.

Acts 2023, 88th Leg., R.S., Ch. 1117 (H.B. 1423), Sec. 1, eff. September 1, 2023.

Acts 2025, 89th Leg., R.S., Ch. 797 (S.B. 1120), Sec. 8, eff. September 1, 2025.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 66 cases (33 in the last 5 years), 2001–2026 · leading case: B.C. v. Rhodes Ex Rel. T.L.R., 116 S.W.3d 878 (Tex. App. 2003).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

B.C. v. Rhodes Ex Rel. T.L.R., 116 S.W.3d 878 (Tex. App. 2003). · cites it 5× “A court's ability to issue injunctive relief ultimately stems from its powers to grant equitable remedies; but its ability to issue a protective order as a result of family violence derives solely from legislative mandate.”

United States v. Rahimi, 602 U.S. 680 (2024). “In Rahimi's case that is one to two years after his release from prison, according to Tex. Fam. Code Ann. § 85.025 (c) (West 2019).”

Pena v. Garza, 61 S.W.3d 529 (Tex. App. 2001). · cites it 4× “Laws 85 (amended 1999) (current version at Tex. Fam.Code Ann. § 85.025 (Vernon 2000)).”

R. M. v. Michael Swearingen, 510 S.W.3d 630 (Tex. App. 2016). · cites it 3× “Tex. Fam. Code Ann. § 85.025 (b)(West Supp.”

Garcia v. State, 212 S.W.3d 877 (Tex. App. 2006). · cites it 2× “See Tex. Fam. Code Ann. § 85.025 (a) (West 2002).”

Wagner v. State, 539 S.W.3d 298 (Tex. Crim. App. 2018). “, Tex. Fam. Code § 85.025(a) (generally providing for two-year duration of protective order due to finding of family violence, except in specified situations in which the judge determines that a longer period is needed and the judge makes specific required findings in support of…”

Cooke v. Cooke, 65 S.W.3d 785 (Tex. App. 2002). · cites it 2× “Tex. Fam.Code Ann. § 85.025(a)(1) (Vernon Supp.”

United States v. Rahimi, 602 U.S. 680 (2024). “In Rahimi’s case that is one to two years after his release from prison, according to Tex. Fam. Code Ann. §85.025 (c) (West 2019).”

In Re Salgado, 53 S.W.3d 752 (Tex. App. 2001). “Tex.Fam.Code Ann. § 85.025(a). We have already outlined the standing consequences.”

Christopher Shaun Pratt v. the State of Texas for the Prot. of Tahana Pratt-Lopez (Tex. App. 2023). · cites it 6× “See TEX. FAM. CODE ANN. § 85.025(a-1). Here, the duration of the default protective order was for the “duration of the lifetimes of both applicant[ Tahana] and [appellant].”

Christine Lenore Stary v. Brady Neal Ethridge (Tex. 2025). · cites it 5× “40 See Tex. Fam. Code § 85.025(a-1) (authorizing the trial court to enter an order for “a period that exceeds two years” upon making the requisite findings); see also In re A.”

Carl Emanuel Lewis v. Bridney Yancy (Tex. App. 2020). · cites it 4× “In four issues, Lewis complains that (1) the evidence is legally and factually insufficient to support issuance of the protective order; (2) the protective order exceeds the time limitation under Texas Family Code section 85.025 and conflicts with temporary orders issued by…”

Show all 66 citing cases →

— Tex. Fam. Code § 85.025(a) — 10 cases

In Re Salgado, 53 S.W.3d 752 (Tex. App. 2001). “Tex.Fam.Code Ann. § 85.025(a). We have already outlined the standing consequences.”

Carl Emanuel Lewis v. Bridney Yancy (Tex. App. 2020). “In four issues, Lewis complains that (1) the evidence is legally and factually insufficient to support issuance of the protective order; (2) the protective order exceeds the time limitation under Texas Family Code section 85.025 and conflicts with temporary orders issued by…”

in the Interest of L.J.H., a Child (Tex. App. 2021).

in the Interest of J.K.R. & H.L.R., Child. (Tex. App. 2022).

— Tex. Fam. Code § 85.025(a)(1) — 4 cases

B.C. v. Rhodes Ex Rel. T.L.R., 116 S.W.3d 878 (Tex. App. 2003). “A court's ability to issue injunctive relief ultimately stems from its powers to grant equitable remedies; but its ability to issue a protective order as a result of family violence derives solely from legislative mandate.”

Cooke v. Cooke, 65 S.W.3d 785 (Tex. App. 2002). “Tex. Fam.Code Ann. § 85.025(a)(1) (Vernon Supp.”

Pena v. Garza, 61 S.W.3d 529 (Tex. App. 2001). “Laws 85 (amended 1999) (current version at Tex. Fam.Code Ann. § 85.025 (Vernon 2000)).”

Suzanna Eckchum A/K/A Susan Eckhert v. State (Tex. App. 2015).

— Tex. Fam. Code § 85.025(b) — 16 cases

Cooke v. Cooke, 65 S.W.3d 785 (Tex. App. 2002). “Tex. Fam.Code Ann. § 85.025(a)(1) (Vernon Supp.”

Pena v. Garza, 61 S.W.3d 529 (Tex. App. 2001). “Laws 85 (amended 1999) (current version at Tex. Fam.Code Ann. § 85.025 (Vernon 2000)).”

Christopher Shaun Pratt v. the State of Texas for the Prot. of Tahana Pratt-Lopez (Tex. App. 2023). “See TEX. FAM. CODE ANN. § 85.025(a-1). Here, the duration of the default protective order was for the “duration of the lifetimes of both applicant[ Tahana] and [appellant].”

Reggie Ariel Jackson v. Kyanne Katrina Cave (Tex. App. 2021).

— Tex. Fam. Code § 85.025(c) — 4 cases

Pena v. Garza, 61 S.W.3d 529 (Tex. App. 2001). “Laws 85 (amended 1999) (current version at Tex. Fam.Code Ann. § 85.025 (Vernon 2000)).”

v. A. C. v. J. L. W. (Tex. App. 2018).

Jonathan Timothy Noyes v. the State of Texas for the Prot. of Samantha Jo Voges (Tex. 2026).

in Re Juan Miguel Mata (Tex. App. 2015).

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.