Penal Code §9.32: Deadly Force in Defense of Your Person

PC §9.32 covers the use of deadly force to defend yourself.

You are justified in using deadly force against another person if you would be justified in using force under §9.31 and you reasonably believe deadly force is immediately necessary to:
- Protect yourself from another person’s use or attempted use of unlawful deadly force or…
- Prevent the other person’s imminent commission of aggravated kidnapping, murder, sexual assault, aggravated sexual assault, robbery, or aggravated robbery.
As with the law regarding the use of force, the use of deadly force is presumed to be reasonable if ALL three of these apply.
1. You believe the other person:
  - Has used force or is attempting to use force to illegally enter your occupied home, occupied vehicle, or occupied place of business or…
  - Is using force or attempting to use force to remove you from your home, vehicle, or place of business or…
  - Is committing or attempting to commit aggravated kidnapping, murder, sexual assault, aggravated sexual assault, robbery, or aggravated robbery.
2. You did not provoke the other person.
3. You were not otherwise engaged in criminal activity, other than a Class C misdemeanor involving a traffic violation.

Example Situation

One busy day at his job, David is working quietly at this desk when he hears an angry voice yell out, “I hate this company, and I’m going to kill every one of you!” About that time, David spots a machete in a deranged-looking stranger’s hand. The stranger turns toward David with an evil look. David draws a gun from his desk drawer. As the man continues toward David with the machete raised, David fires two shots at the attacker, killing him.

In this situation, the law allows David to use force or deadly force when and to the degree he reasonably believes it is immediately necessary to defend himself. Here, David skipped mere force and immediately used deadly force. Was this reasonable? Should David have first used non-deadly force? Should he have used a method of dispute resolution? If he could have retreated out the back door, was his use of deadly force really immediately necessary? If David does not qualify for the legal presumptions under sections 9.31 and 9.32, these are the types of questions and issues that will be presented to the jury to determine.

However, in this example, because David is about to be a victim of murder, the law will deem “reasonable” his belief that deadly force was immediately necessary! This is a powerful legal presumption and limits prosecutorial arguments regarding the reasonableness of when the force was used or the degree of force used, because it is legally deemed “reasonable.” How do we know David acted in self-defense? In this example, the attacker makes it easy, because he cleared up any ambiguity of his intentions when he declared “I am going to kill every one of you” while wielding a machete. The attacker is attempting to use force in David’s place of business, David did nothing to provoke the attacker, and David was not engaged in criminal activity. Thus, under Texas law, David, as a would-be victim of murder, is entitled to a legal presumption that he had a reasonable belief that it was immediately necessary to use force or deadly force against the attacker to prevent his own murder. Therefore, David is legally justified in using deadly force.

Source: Texas Gun Law: Armed and Educated published by Texas LawShield, LLP

Unit 1 of 4
Topic 5 of 7
Page 8 of 16

Previous Next Back to the Study Guide Index

Course Outline