Texas Codes

Tex. Penal Code § 33.02 (2026)

Breach Of Computer Security

✓ current as of May 2026

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

Sec. 33.02. BREACH OF COMPUTER SECURITY. (a) A person commits an offense if the person knowingly accesses a computer, computer network, or computer system without the effective consent of the owner.

(b) An offense under Subsection (a) is a Class B misdemeanor, except that the offense is a state jail felony if:

(1) the defendant has been previously convicted two or more times of an offense under this chapter; or

(2) the computer, computer network, or computer system is owned by the government or a critical infrastructure facility.

(b-1) A person commits an offense if, with the intent to defraud or harm another or alter, damage, or delete property, the person knowingly accesses:

(1) a computer, computer network, or computer system without the effective consent of the owner; or

(2) a computer, computer network, or computer system:

(A) that is owned by:

(i) the government; or

(ii) a business or other commercial entity engaged in a business activity;

(B) in violation of:

(i) a clear and conspicuous prohibition by the owner of the computer, computer network, or computer system; or

(ii) a contractual agreement to which the person has expressly agreed; and

(C) with the intent to obtain or use a file, data, or proprietary information stored in the computer, network, or system to defraud or harm another or alter, damage, or delete property.

(b-2) An offense under Subsection (b-1) is:

(1) a Class C misdemeanor if the aggregate amount involved is less than $100;

(2) a Class B misdemeanor if the aggregate amount involved is $100 or more but less than $750;

(3) a Class A misdemeanor if the aggregate amount involved is $750 or more but less than $2,500;

(4) a state jail felony if the aggregate amount involved is $2,500 or more but less than $30,000;

(5) a felony of the third degree if the aggregate amount involved is $30,000 or more but less than $150,000;

(6) a felony of the second degree if:

(A) the aggregate amount involved is $150,000 or more but less than $300,000;

(B) the aggregate amount involved is any amount less than $300,000 and the computer, computer network, or computer system is owned by the government or a critical infrastructure facility; or

(C) the actor obtains the identifying information of another by accessing only one computer, computer network, or computer system; or

(7) a felony of the first degree if:

(A) the aggregate amount involved is $300,000 or more; or

(B) the actor obtains the identifying information of another by accessing more than one computer, computer network, or computer system.

(c) When benefits are obtained, a victim is defrauded or harmed, or property is altered, damaged, or deleted in violation of this section, whether or not in a single incident, the conduct may be considered as one offense and the value of the benefits obtained and of the losses incurred because of the fraud, harm, or alteration, damage, or deletion of property may be aggregated in determining the grade of the offense.

(d) A person who is subject to prosecution under this section and any other section of this code may be prosecuted under either or both sections.

(e) It is a defense to prosecution under this section that the person acted with the intent to facilitate a lawful seizure or search of, or lawful access to, a computer, computer network, or computer system for a legitimate law enforcement purpose.

(f) It is a defense to prosecution under Subsection (b-1)(2) that the actor's conduct consisted solely of action taken pursuant to a contract that was entered into with the owner of the computer, computer network, or computer system for the purpose of assessing the security of the computer, network, or system or providing other security-related services.

Added by Acts 1985, 69th Leg., ch. 600, Sec. 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1985. Amended by Acts 1989, 71st Leg., ch. 306, Sec. 2, eff. Sept. 1, 1989; Acts 1993, 73rd Leg., ch. 900, Sec. 1.01, eff. Sept. 1, 1994; Acts 1997, 75th Leg., ch. 306, Sec. 2, eff. Sept. 1, 1997; Acts 2001, 77th Leg., ch. 1411, Sec. 1, eff. Sept. 1, 2001.

Amended by:

Acts 2011, 82nd Leg., R.S., Ch. 1044 (H.B. 3396), Sec. 2, eff. September 1, 2011.

Acts 2015, 84th Leg., R.S., Ch. 154 (H.B. 896), Sec. 1, eff. September 1, 2015.

Acts 2015, 84th Leg., R.S., Ch. 1251 (H.B. 1396), Sec. 23, eff. September 1, 2015.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 53 cases (21 in the last 5 years), 2000–2026 · leading case: Brackens v. State, 312 S.W.3d 831 (Tex. App. 2010).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Brackens v. State, 312 S.W.3d 831 (Tex. App. 2010). · cites it 10× “" It found that appellant consented to Legg performing "the data migration" and Legg had to open the files to perform appellant's work request.”

Ruiz, Lauro Eduardo, 577 S.W.3d 543 (Tex. Crim. App. 2019). · cites it 3× “It is a defense to breach of computer security that the accused "acted with the intent to facilitate a lawful seizure or search of, or lawful access to, a computer, computer network, or computer system for a legitimate law enforcement purpose.”

Muhammed v. State, 331 S.W.3d 187 (Tex. App. 2011). · cites it 3× “See Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 33.02 (West 2003).”

Devon Alexander Kane v. State of Texas, 458 S.W.3d 180 (Tex. App. 2015). · cites it 4× “Exclusion of Evidence Obtained in violation of Texas Penal Code section 33.02 — Breach of Computer Security Kane’s argument relies on Texas Penal Code section 33.”

Baird v. State, 398 S.W.3d 220 (Tex. Crim. App. 2013). “”); Tex. Penal Code § 33.02(a) ("A person commits an offense if the person knowingly accesses a computer, computer network, or computer system without effective consent of the owner.”

Sw. Airlines Co. v. Farechase, Inc., 318 F. Supp. 2d 435 (N.D. Tex. 2004). · cites it 2× “The Texas Penal Code § 33.02(a) reads: “A person commits an offense if the person knowingly accesses a computer, computer network, or computer system without the effective consent of the owner.”

Miranda Renea Kelso v. State, 562 S.W.3d 120 (Tex. App. 2018). “” TEX. PENAL CODE ANN. § 33.02 (West 2016).”

Lambrecht & Assocs., Inc. v. State Farm Lloyds, 119 S.W.3d 16 (Tex. App. 2003). “Tex Pen.Code Ann. § 33.02 (Vernon 1997).”

TravelJungle v. Am. Airlines, Inc., 212 S.W.3d 841 (Tex. App. 2006). “Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 33.02 (Vernon 2003).”

Miller v. State, 335 S.W.3d 847 (Tex. App. 2011). “” Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 33.02 (a) (West 2003).”

Reliant Hosp. Partners, LLC v. Cornerstone Healthcare Grp. Holdings, Inc., 374 S.W.3d 488 (Tex. App. 2012). “001 and Texas Penal Code section 33.02, (4) Texas Theft Liability Act violations, (5) tortious interference, (6) conspiracy, (7) aiding and abetting, (8) conversion, and (9) business disparagement.”

Heidi Grp. v. TX Hlth Human Svc, 138 F.4th 920 (5th Cir. 2025). · cites it 2× “” Tex. Penal Code § 33.02(a); see also Tex.”

Show all 53 citing cases →

— Tex. Penal Code § 33.02(a) — 24 cases

Ruiz, Lauro Eduardo, 577 S.W.3d 543 (Tex. Crim. App. 2019). “It is a defense to breach of computer security that the accused "acted with the intent to facilitate a lawful seizure or search of, or lawful access to, a computer, computer network, or computer system for a legitimate law enforcement purpose.”

Sw. Airlines Co. v. Farechase, Inc., 318 F. Supp. 2d 435 (N.D. Tex. 2004). “The Texas Penal Code § 33.02(a) reads: “A person commits an offense if the person knowingly accesses a computer, computer network, or computer system without the effective consent of the owner.”

Brackens v. State, 312 S.W.3d 831 (Tex. App. 2010). “" It found that appellant consented to Legg performing "the data migration" and Legg had to open the files to perform appellant's work request.”

Heidi Grp. v. TX Hlth Human Svc, 138 F.4th 920 (5th Cir. 2025). “” Tex. Penal Code § 33.02(a); see also Tex.”

— Tex. Penal Code § 33.02(e) — 2 cases

The State of Texas v. Matthew Martin (Tex. App. 2025).

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.