Sec. 9.43. PROTECTION OF THIRD PERSON'S PROPERTY. A person is justified in using force or deadly force against another to protect land or tangible, movable property of a third person if, under the circumstances as he reasonably believes them to be, the actor would be justified under Section 9.41 or 9.42 in using force or deadly force to protect his own land or property and:
(1) the actor reasonably believes the unlawful interference constitutes attempted or consummated theft of or criminal mischief to the tangible, movable property; or
(2) the actor reasonably believes that:
(A) the third person has requested his protection of the land or property;
(B) he has a legal duty to protect the third person's land or property; or
(C) the third person whose land or property he uses force or deadly force to protect is the actor's spouse, parent, or child, resides with the actor, or is under the actor's care.
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
Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Odem, 929 S.W.2d 513 (Tex. App. 1996).
· cites it 3× “[3] Moreover, we reject appellants' attempt to invoke the benefits of Texas Penal Code section 9.43 which provides: A person is justified in using force or deadly force against another to protect *523 land or tangible, movable property or a third person if, under the…”
Young v. State, 542 S.W.3d 830 (Tex. App. 2018).
“, not designated for publication) (citing TEX. PENAL CODE ANN. § 9.43 ). Under section 9.”
Abel Cervantes v. State (Tex. App. 2015).
“See TEX. PENAL CODE ANN. § 9.43 (West 2011). However, it is important to note that Section 9.”
Robert Solis v. State (Tex. App. 2004).
“See Tex. Pen. Code Ann. § 9.43 (stating that person is justified in using deadly force to protect third person’s property if, among other things, “the actor reasonably believes that the third person has requested his protection of the land or property.”
Crispin Manuel Sheldon v. State (Tex. App. 2013).
“TEX. PENAL CODE ANN. § 9.43 (West 2011). Here, appellant testified that Zimmer stole a newspaper from McDonald’s and that he went outside to confront Zimmer about the purported theft.”
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.