Tex. Codes » Penal Code · TITLE 2. GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF CRIMINAL RESPONSIBILITY · CHAPTER 6. CULPABILITY GENERALLY
Texas Codes

Tex. Penal Code § 6.02 (2026)

Requirement Of Culpability

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section TX-LEGstatutes.capitol.texas.gov Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Sec. 6.02. REQUIREMENT OF CULPABILITY. (a) Except as provided in Subsection (b), a person does not commit an offense unless he intentionally, knowingly, recklessly, or with criminal negligence engages in conduct as the definition of the offense requires.

(b) If the definition of an offense does not prescribe a culpable mental state, a culpable mental state is nevertheless required unless the definition plainly dispenses with any mental element.

(c) If the definition of an offense does not prescribe a culpable mental state, but one is nevertheless required under Subsection (b), intent, knowledge, or recklessness suffices to establish criminal responsibility.

(d) Culpable mental states are classified according to relative degrees, from highest to lowest, as follows:

(1) intentional;

(2) knowing;

(3) reckless;

(4) criminal negligence.

(e) Proof of a higher degree of culpability than that charged constitutes proof of the culpability charged.

(f) An offense defined by municipal ordinance or by order of a county commissioners court may not dispense with the requirement of a culpable mental state if the offense is punishable by a fine exceeding the amount authorized by Section 12.23.

Acts 1973, 63rd Leg., p. 883, ch. 399, Sec. 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1974. Amended by Acts 1993, 73rd Leg., ch. 900, Sec. 1.01, eff. Sept. 1, 1994.

Amended by:

Acts 2005, 79th Leg., Ch. 1219 (H.B. 970), Sec. 1, eff. September 1, 2005.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 329 cases (27 in the last 5 years), 1978–2026 · leading case: Wasylina v. State, 275 S.W.3d 908 (Tex. Crim. App. 2009).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Wasylina v. State, 275 S.W.3d 908 (Tex. Crim. App. 2009). · cites it 10× “09(3); see also TEX. PENAL CODE § 6.02(d)(classifying culpable mental states from highest to lowest).”
Cook v. State, 884 S.W.2d 485 (Tex. Crim. App. 1994). · cites it 6× “Tex.Penal Code Ann. § 6.02(a). The underlined portion of the proposed provision, making mental state applicable to each element of the offense, does not appear in the current code.”
Robinson, Leo Demory, 466 S.W.3d 166 (Tex. Crim. App. 2015). · cites it 5× “Tex. Penal Code § 6.02(b). . Id. § 6.02(c) ("If the definition of an offense does not prescribe a culpable mental state, but one is nevertheless required under Subsection (b), intent, knowledge, or recklessness suffices to establish criminal responsibility.”
Johnson v. State, 967 S.W.2d 848 (Tex. Crim. App. 1998). · cites it 12× “The next consideration is the interaction of TEX. PEN.CODE §§ 6.02 and 21.11. Tex. Penal Code § 6.”
Celis, Mauricio Rodriguez, 416 S.W.3d 419 (Tex. Crim. App. 2013). · cites it 4× “-Corpus Christi 2011) (citing Tex. Penal Code §§ 6.02, *423 38.122). The court of appeals was “not persuaded that the [statute] is silent on the requirement of a culpable mental state.”
State v. Rodriguez, 339 S.W.3d 680 (Tex. Crim. App. 2011). · cites it 8× “[3] See TEX. PENAL CODE § 6.02(a) ("A person acts intentionally, or with intent, with respect to .”
Roark & Hardee LP v. City of Austin, 522 F.3d 533 (5th Cir. 2008). · cites it 3× “Second, the district court enjoined the City from seeking fines of more than $500 under § 10-6-11, so that the ordinance was in compliance with Texas Penal Code § 6.02(f). 6 Id. at 919-20 & n.”
Borden v. United States, 593 U.S. 420 (2021). “1990); Tex. Penal Code Ann. §6.02 (c) (West 1974); Utah Code Ann.”
Landrian v. State, 268 S.W.3d 532 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008). · cites it 2× “[26] TEX. PENAL CODE § 6.02(e) ("Proof of a higher degree of culpability than that charged constitutes proof of the culpability charged.”
City of Houston v. Hill, 482 U.S. 451 (1987). · cites it 2× “Texas Penal Code Ann. § 6.02(b) (1974) provides: "If the definition of an offense does not prescribe a culpable mental state, a culpable mental state is nevertheless required unless the definition plainly dispenses with any mental element.”
Ex Parte Martinez, 195 S.W.3d 713 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006). · cites it 2× “In Mendenhall , we stated that the defense of temporary insanity due to voluntary intoxication is not available to defendants who claim that they were unconscious or semi-conscious at the time of the alleged offense because they may argue either that they lacked the mens rea…”
Sanchez v. State, 995 S.W.2d 677 (Tex. Crim. App. 1999). · cites it 4× “Texas Penal Code § 6.02 states that a person does not commit an offense unless he intentionally, knowingly, recklessly, or with criminal negligence engages in conduct delineated in the definition of the offense.”
Show all 329 citing cases →
Tex. Penal Code § 6.02(a): 34 cases
Ex Parte Martinez, 195 S.W.3d 713 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006). “In Mendenhall , we stated that the defense of temporary insanity due to voluntary intoxication is not available to defendants who claim that they were unconscious or semi-conscious at the time of the alleged offense because they may argue either that they lacked the mens rea…”
Cook v. State, 884 S.W.2d 485 (Tex. Crim. App. 1994). “Tex.Penal Code Ann. § 6.02(a). The underlined portion of the proposed provision, making mental state applicable to each element of the offense, does not appear in the current code.”
Daugherty, Tonya Jean, 387 S.W.3d 654 (Tex. Crim. App. 2013).
Rogers v. State, 105 S.W.3d 630 (Tex. Crim. App. 2003).
State v. Rodriguez, 339 S.W.3d 680 (Tex. Crim. App. 2011). “[3] See TEX. PENAL CODE § 6.02(a) ("A person acts intentionally, or with intent, with respect to .”
Tex. Penal Code § 6.02(b): 62 cases
Robinson, Leo Demory, 466 S.W.3d 166 (Tex. Crim. App. 2015). “Tex. Penal Code § 6.02(b). . Id. § 6.02(c) ("If the definition of an offense does not prescribe a culpable mental state, but one is nevertheless required under Subsection (b), intent, knowledge, or recklessness suffices to establish criminal responsibility.”
State v. Rodriguez, 339 S.W.3d 680 (Tex. Crim. App. 2011). “[3] See TEX. PENAL CODE § 6.02(a) ("A person acts intentionally, or with intent, with respect to .”
City of Houston v. Hill, 482 U.S. 451 (1987). “Texas Penal Code Ann. § 6.02(b) (1974) provides: "If the definition of an offense does not prescribe a culpable mental state, a culpable mental state is nevertheless required unless the definition plainly dispenses with any mental element.”
Celis, Mauricio Rodriguez, 416 S.W.3d 419 (Tex. Crim. App. 2013). “-Corpus Christi 2011) (citing Tex. Penal Code §§ 6.02, *423 38.122). The court of appeals was “not persuaded that the [statute] is silent on the requirement of a culpable mental state.”
Cook v. State, 884 S.W.2d 485 (Tex. Crim. App. 1994). “Tex.Penal Code Ann. § 6.02(a). The underlined portion of the proposed provision, making mental state applicable to each element of the offense, does not appear in the current code.”
Tex. Penal Code § 6.02(b)(1974): 1 case
Harper v. Lindsay, 454 F. Supp. 597 (S.D. Tex. 1978).
Tex. Penal Code § 6.02(b)(c): 1 case
David Barker v. State (Tex. App. 2013).
Tex. Penal Code § 6.02(c): 19 cases
Robinson, Leo Demory, 466 S.W.3d 166 (Tex. Crim. App. 2015). “Tex. Penal Code § 6.02(b). . Id. § 6.02(c) ("If the definition of an offense does not prescribe a culpable mental state, but one is nevertheless required under Subsection (b), intent, knowledge, or recklessness suffices to establish criminal responsibility.”
Texas Dep't of Pub. Saf. v. Axt, 292 S.W.3d 736 (Tex. App. 2009).
Wootton v. State, 132 S.W.3d 80 (Tex. App. 2004).
Schultz v. State, 923 S.W.2d 1 (Tex. Crim. App. 1996).
Doe v. Abbott, 345 F. Supp. 3d 763 (N.D. Tex. 2018).
Tex. Penal Code § 6.02(d): 30 cases
Wasylina v. State, 275 S.W.3d 908 (Tex. Crim. App. 2009). “09(3); see also TEX. PENAL CODE § 6.02(d)(classifying culpable mental states from highest to lowest).”
Flores v. State, 245 S.W.3d 432 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008).
Cook v. State, 884 S.W.2d 485 (Tex. Crim. App. 1994). “Tex.Penal Code Ann. § 6.02(a). The underlined portion of the proposed provision, making mental state applicable to each element of the offense, does not appear in the current code.”
Reed v. State, 117 S.W.3d 260 (Tex. Crim. App. 2003).
Cavazos, Abraham, 382 S.W.3d 377 (Tex. Crim. App. 2012).
Tex. Penal Code § 6.02(d)(1): 2 cases
Laviage v. Fite, 47 F.4th 402 (5th Cir. 2022).
Latimer v. State, 650 S.W.2d 497 (Tex. App. 1983).
Tex. Penal Code § 6.02(d)(3): 1 case
Gowans v. State, 995 S.W.2d 787 (Tex. App. 1999).
Tex. Penal Code § 6.02(d)(e): 1 case
Brown v. State, 183 S.W.3d 728 (Tex. App. 2006).
Tex. Penal Code § 6.02(d)(l): 1 case
Torres v. State, 52 S.W.3d 285 (Tex. App. 2001).
Tex. Penal Code § 6.02(e): 31 cases
Wasylina v. State, 275 S.W.3d 908 (Tex. Crim. App. 2009). “09(3); see also TEX. PENAL CODE § 6.02(d)(classifying culpable mental states from highest to lowest).”
Landrian v. State, 268 S.W.3d 532 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008). “[26] TEX. PENAL CODE § 6.02(e) ("Proof of a higher degree of culpability than that charged constitutes proof of the culpability charged.”
Contreras v. State, 312 S.W.3d 566 (Tex. Crim. App. 2010).
Thompson v. State, 236 S.W.3d 787 (Tex. Crim. App. 2007).
Crumpton v. State, 301 S.W.3d 663 (Tex. Crim. App. 2009).
Tex. Penal Code § 6.02(f): 6 cases
Roark & Hardee LP v. City of Austin, 522 F.3d 533 (5th Cir. 2008). “Second, the district court enjoined the City from seeking fines of more than $500 under § 10-6-11, so that the ordinance was in compliance with Texas Penal Code § 6.02(f). 6 Id. at 919-20 & n.”
Bcca Appeal Grp., Inc. v. City of Houston, Texas, 496 S.W.3d 1 (Tex. 2016).
Timothy O'Reilly v. State, 501 S.W.3d 722 (Tex. App. 2016).
Roark & Hardee L.P. v. City of Austin, 394 F. Supp. 2d 911 (W.D. Tex. 2005).
Roark & Hardee LP v. City of Austin (5th Cir. 2008).
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.