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

Tex. Penal Code § 6.04 (2026)

Causation: Conduct And Results

✓ laws through the 89th Legislature (2025)
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section TX-LEGstatutes.capitol.texas.gov Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Sec. 6.04. CAUSATION: CONDUCT AND RESULTS. (a) A person is criminally responsible if the result would not have occurred but for his conduct, operating either alone or concurrently with another cause, unless the concurrent cause was clearly sufficient to produce the result and the conduct of the actor clearly insufficient.

(b) A person is nevertheless criminally responsible for causing a result if the only difference between what actually occurred and what he desired, contemplated, or risked is that:

(1) a different offense was committed; or

(2) a different person or property was injured, harmed, or otherwise affected.

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.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 403 cases (59 in the last 5 years), 1981–2026 · leading case: Williams v. State, 235 S.W.3d 742 (Tex. Crim. App. 2007).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Williams v. State, 235 S.W.3d 742 (Tex. Crim. App. 2007). · cites it 6× “Texas Penal Code § 6.04(a) provides, "A person is criminally responsible if the result would not have occurred but for his conduct, operating either alone or concurrently with another cause, unless the concurrent cause was clearly sufficient to produce the result and the conduct…”
Roberts v. State, 273 S.W.3d 322 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008). · cites it 10× “[6] See TEX. PENAL CODE § 6.04(b). [7] See id., § 1.”
Patterson v. State, 46 S.W.3d 294 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2001). · cites it 8× “Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 6.04 (a). As previously stated, with a result-oriented offense, a person is criminally responsible if the result would not have occurred "but for" the actor's conduct.”
McFarland v. State, 928 S.W.2d 482 (Tex. Crim. App. 1996). · cites it 4× “[35] In supplemental point of error eleven, appellant maintains that the trial court erred by refusing to submit his special requested instruction on concurrent causation under Texas Penal Code § 6.04(a). [36] Appellant argues that the evidence made it possible to infer that, if…”
Trevino v. State, 228 S.W.3d 729 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi 2006). · cites it 6× “TEX. PEN.CODE ANN. § 6.04(b)(2) (Vernon 2003).”
Rodriguez v. State, 191 S.W.3d 428 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi 2006). · cites it 6× “The jury could reasonably infer that, by reason of intoxication, Rodriguez caused serious bodily injury to Perez after a head-on collision in which Rodriguez was the errant driver on a familiar road.”
Thompson v. State, 236 S.W.3d 787 (Tex. Crim. App. 2007). · cites it 4× “Texas Penal Code § 6.04 provides, in its entirety: (a) A person is criminally responsible if the result would not have occurred but for his conduct, operating either alone or concurrently with another cause, unless the concurrent cause was clearly sufficient to produce the…”
Ferrel v. State, 55 S.W.3d 586 (Tex. Crim. App. 2001). · cites it 2× “[10] Tex. Pen.Code Ann. § 6.04(a). [11] Ferrel, 16 S.”
Rodriguez v. State, 538 S.W.3d 623 (Tex. Crim. App. 2018). · cites it 4× “State , we "consider[ed] the scope of" Texas Penal Code Section 6.04(b)(1), which provides: A person is nevertheless criminally responsible for causing a result if the only difference between what actually occurred and what he desired, contemplated, or risked is that .”
Jones v. State, 815 S.W.2d 667 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). · cites it 4× “See Tex.Penal Code Ann. § 6.04(b)(2). [2] The *669 included an abstract instruction on the law of transferred intent, but failed to apply this law to the facts of the case in the application paragraph.”
Otto v. State, 141 S.W.3d 238 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2004). · cites it 6× “" In addition, the court included an instruction, at the State's request, on causation pursuant to Texas Penal Code section 6.04. TEX. PENAL CODE ANN.”
Bell v. State, 169 S.W.3d 384 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2005). · cites it 3× “See Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 6.04 (a) (Vernon 2003).”
Show all 403 citing cases →
Tex. Penal Code § 6.04(a): 135 cases
Williams v. State, 235 S.W.3d 742 (Tex. Crim. App. 2007). “Texas Penal Code § 6.04(a) provides, "A person is criminally responsible if the result would not have occurred but for his conduct, operating either alone or concurrently with another cause, unless the concurrent cause was clearly sufficient to produce the result and the conduct…”
McFarland v. State, 928 S.W.2d 482 (Tex. Crim. App. 1996). “[35] In supplemental point of error eleven, appellant maintains that the trial court erred by refusing to submit his special requested instruction on concurrent causation under Texas Penal Code § 6.04(a). [36] Appellant argues that the evidence made it possible to infer that, if…”
Ferrel v. State, 55 S.W.3d 586 (Tex. Crim. App. 2001). “[10] Tex. Pen.Code Ann. § 6.04(a). [11] Ferrel, 16 S.”
Patterson v. State, 46 S.W.3d 294 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2001). “Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 6.04 (a). As previously stated, with a result-oriented offense, a person is criminally responsible if the result would not have occurred "but for" the actor's conduct.”
Longoria v. State, 154 S.W.3d 747 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2005).
Tex. Penal Code § 6.04(b): 21 cases
Roberts v. State, 273 S.W.3d 322 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008). “[6] See TEX. PENAL CODE § 6.04(b). [7] See id., § 1.”
Lewis v. State, 88 S.W.3d 383 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2002).
Johnson v. State, 982 S.W.2d 403 (Tex. Crim. App. 1998).
Hatten v. Quarterman, 570 F.3d 595 (5th Cir. 2009).
Chimney v. State, 6 S.W.3d 681 (Tex. App.—Waco 1999).
Tex. Penal Code § 6.04(b)(1): 15 cases
Rodriguez v. State, 538 S.W.3d 623 (Tex. Crim. App. 2018). “State , we "consider[ed] the scope of" Texas Penal Code Section 6.04(b)(1), which provides: A person is nevertheless criminally responsible for causing a result if the only difference between what actually occurred and what he desired, contemplated, or risked is that .”
Thompson v. State, 236 S.W.3d 787 (Tex. Crim. App. 2007). “Texas Penal Code § 6.04 provides, in its entirety: (a) A person is criminally responsible if the result would not have occurred but for his conduct, operating either alone or concurrently with another cause, unless the concurrent cause was clearly sufficient to produce the…”
Saucedo, Andrew Melchor, 576 S.W.3d 712 (Tex. Crim. App. 2019).
Louis, Cory Don, 393 S.W.3d 246 (Tex. Crim. App. 2012).
Gordon v. State, 640 S.W.2d 743 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 1982).
Tex. Penal Code § 6.04(b)(2): 41 cases
Roberts v. State, 273 S.W.3d 322 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008). “[6] See TEX. PENAL CODE § 6.04(b). [7] See id., § 1.”
Trevino v. State, 228 S.W.3d 729 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi 2006). “TEX. PEN.CODE ANN. § 6.04(b)(2) (Vernon 2003).”
Jones v. State, 815 S.W.2d 667 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). “See Tex.Penal Code Ann. § 6.04(b)(2). [2] The *669 included an abstract instruction on the law of transferred intent, but failed to apply this law to the facts of the case in the application paragraph.”
Rogelio Delacerda v. State, 425 S.W.3d 367 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2011).
Castillo v. State, 71 S.W.3d 812 (Tex. App.—Amarillo 2002).
Tex. Penal Code § 6.04(c): 1 case
Jones v. State, 100 S.W.3d 1 (Tex. App.—Tyler 2003).
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.