An injury does not necessarily tell you who committed a crime.
Two people may fight and both may be injured. Someone may push another person away, defend against a punch, respond to an attack, or use force while trying to escape a confrontation.
Police may arrive only after everything is over and have to decide whom to arrest based upon conflicting accounts and what they observe at the scene.
Texas law recognizes self-defense. But saying "I was defending myself" does not automatically resolve the case. The evidence must be analyzed under the rules governing when and how force may lawfully be used.
At Taylor Defense Firm, we reconstruct the confrontation from the beginning:
- Who initiated the encounter?
- What force was used or threatened?
- What did the accused reasonably believe was happening?
- What force was used in response?
- Did the threat continue?
- What do the injuries, witnesses, recordings, and physical evidence show?
What Does Texas Law Say About Self-Defense?
Texas Penal Code §9.31 addresses justification for the use of force against another person.
Generally, a person may be justified in using force against another when and to the degree the person reasonably believes the force is immediately necessary to protect against the other's use or attempted use of unlawful force, subject to the limitations and circumstances established by Texas law.
Several words in that rule matter:
- reasonably believes
- immediately necessary
- protect
- use or attempted use of unlawful force
A self-defense case therefore depends heavily upon what was happening when the accused used force—not merely what the scene looked like after the confrontation ended.
Self-Defense Is a Justification, Not a Separate Crime
Self-defense does not have its own punishment range.
Instead, it may provide a legal justification for conduct that would otherwise constitute an offense.
The potential punishment therefore comes from the offense charged.
For example, a self-defense issue may arise in a misdemeanor assault case, an aggravated assault prosecution, or even a homicide case. The potential punishment can be dramatically different even though the justification issue involves the same fundamental question:
Was the accused legally justified in using the force employed under the circumstances?
Ordinary Assault Can Carry Different Punishment Levels
Texas Penal Code §22.01 contains several forms of assault, and the classification depends upon the particular allegation and circumstances.
A bodily-injury assault is commonly charged as a Class A misdemeanor, which generally carries up to one year in county jail and a fine of up to $4,000.
But assault can become a felony under circumstances specified by Texas law, including certain family-violence situations and other statutorily identified relationships or conditions.
That is why the charging instrument and criminal history must be examined before assuming the punishment range from the word "assault."
Aggravated Assault Carries Much Greater Exposure
Texas Penal Code §22.02 addresses aggravated assault.
Aggravated assault is generally a second-degree felony, punishable by 2 to 20 years in prison and a fine of up to $10,000.
Under circumstances specifically identified by statute, aggravated assault can become a first-degree felony, carrying a substantially greater punishment range.
A self-defense claim can therefore arise in a case carrying very serious potential consequences.
The severity of an injury or presence of a weapon does not automatically eliminate self-defense. Those facts instead become part of determining what force was reasonably perceived and whether the responsive force was justified.
Who Started the Physical Confrontation?
This is often one of the first factual questions.
A verbal argument may precede physical violence.
We want to determine when the interaction crossed from words into force:
- Who touched whom first?
- Was someone pushed?
- Was a punch thrown?
- Was someone grabbed?
- Was a weapon displayed?
- Was someone attempting to leave?
- Was an exit blocked?
The answers may be disputed, which makes contemporaneous evidence particularly valuable.
Words Alone and Physical Force Are Not the Same Thing
People can say offensive, angry, or provocative things during an argument.
Self-defense law does not simply permit physical force whenever someone becomes angry because of another person's words.
The defense analysis focuses upon the circumstances surrounding the use or attempted use of unlawful force and the statutory rules governing justification.
That distinction can be particularly important in domestic arguments where both people exchanged insults before the physical confrontation began.
The Accused's Belief Must Be Examined From the Circumstances
Self-defense involves what the accused reasonably believed was occurring.
That means the investigation should consider the confrontation from the accused's perspective while also examining the objective circumstances.
Relevant facts may include:
- relative size and strength;
- number of people involved;
- prior conduct where legally relevant;
- threats;
- weapons;
- location;
- physical positioning;
- injuries;
- ability to retreat or escape where legally relevant to the particular issue;
- conduct immediately before force was used; and
- whether the threat was continuing.
A jury may ultimately have to decide whether the asserted belief was reasonable under the circumstances.
Texas Law Does Not Always Require Retreat Before Force Is Used
Texas self-defense law contains important provisions concerning retreat.
Under circumstances specified by statute, a person who has a right to be present at the location, has not provoked the person against whom force is used, and is not engaged in criminal activity at the time the force is used is not required to retreat before using justified force.
The factfinder also may be restricted from considering a failure to retreat when the statutory requirements apply.
This is sometimes referred to generally as Texas's "stand your ground" law.
But slogans are less useful than the actual statutory requirements.
Whether those provisions apply depends upon the facts of the case.
Provocation Can Matter
Self-defense has statutory limitations.
One important issue can be whether the accused provoked the other's use or attempted use of unlawful force, subject to the rules and exceptions established by Texas law.
This makes the beginning of the confrontation especially important.
The prosecution may claim:
"The defendant started it."
The defense may contend:
"The other person initiated the unlawful force."
Video, witnesses, messages, 911 recordings, injuries, and physical evidence may help resolve that dispute.
Force and Deadly Force Are Different
Texas law distinguishes force from deadly force.
Texas Penal Code §9.32 addresses when deadly force may be justified in defense of a person.
The legal requirements for deadly force are more demanding than the rules governing ordinary force.
This distinction can become critical in cases involving:
- firearms;
- knives;
- severe physical force;
- alleged strangulation;
- vehicles;
- multiple attackers; or
- circumstances presenting a claimed threat of death or serious bodily injury.
The defense should identify precisely what level of force was used and what level of threat the accused reasonably perceived.
The Amount of Force Matters
Self-defense does not necessarily authorize unlimited force.
Texas law generally focuses upon force when and to the degree the person reasonably believes it is immediately necessary.
That creates another timeline question:
- When did the threat begin?
- What response occurred?
- When did the threat end?
- Did the use of force stop?
A response that may have been justified at one moment can raise different issues if force continues after the threat has ended.
Injuries to Both People Can Be Important
Police reports sometimes focus primarily on the injuries of the person identified as the complainant.
We also want to document the accused's condition.
That can include:
- bruises;
- scratches;
- bite marks;
- torn clothing;
- defensive injuries;
- photographs;
- medical treatment; and
- statements made to police about those injuries.
Injuries do not automatically prove who initiated a confrontation.
But the complete injury pattern may help test competing accounts.
Body-Camera Footage Can Preserve the Immediate Aftermath
Body-camera evidence may show:
- Who appeared injured?
- What did each person say happened?
- Did either person admit using force?
- Did someone claim self-defense immediately?
- Were witnesses present?
- Was anyone intoxicated?
- What did the scene look like?
- Did officers photograph injuries to both parties?
A self-defense claim first documented months later may be evaluated differently from one supported by evidence preserved at the scene.
That does not mean an accused person must immediately provide police with a detailed statement. It means contemporaneous evidence can be important when reconstructing what actually occurred.
The 911 Call Can Reveal Who Was Doing What Before Police Arrived
A 911 recording may capture part of the confrontation itself.
Background audio can sometimes be as important as the caller's statements.
Depending upon the recording, it may preserve:
- threats;
- yelling;
- impact sounds;
- statements by both parties;
- attempts to leave;
- instructions to stop;
- statements concerning weapons; or
- comments by witnesses.
That evidence may support one account, contradict another, or establish a sequence neither party later describes accurately.
Self-Defense Can Exist Even When the Other Person Is Seriously Injured
A serious bodily injury can make a prosecution emotionally powerful.
But the extent of the injury and the legal justification for the force are separate questions.
The jury may need to determine both:
What force caused the injury?
and
Was that force justified when it was used?
Serious bodily injury does not automatically defeat self-defense.
Neither does asserting self-defense automatically justify every injury inflicted.
The complete confrontation matters.
Self-Defense Can Exist in a Deadly-Weapon Case
The presence of a deadly weapon can dramatically increase the stakes.
It may also be central to why the accused claims force was necessary.
We examine:
- Who possessed the weapon?
- Who introduced it into the confrontation?
- Was it displayed or used?
- What did the accused reasonably perceive?
- Was the weapon recovered?
- What do witnesses and video show?
The existence of a weapon does not answer the self-defense question by itself.
Family Violence Does Not Eliminate Self-Defense
A family or dating relationship does not deprive a person of the right to defend against unlawful force.
Family-violence cases can be especially complicated because the parties often have a long history and police may be entering an ongoing relationship conflict.
The defense should distinguish relevant evidence from generalized claims about the relationship.
The immediate confrontation still matters.
Build the Confrontation in Sequence
At Taylor Defense Firm, we may reconstruct a self-defense case as:
events before confrontation → verbal interaction → first threat or use of force → accused's perception → responsive force → escalation or de-escalation → end of threat → injuries → 911 call → police arrival → initial statements → physical evidence → later statements.
We then ask:
- Who initiated the unlawful force?
- What did the accused reasonably believe was happening?
- Was responsive force immediately necessary?
- What degree of force was used?
- Was deadly force involved?
- Did the threat continue?
- Did the accused provoke the encounter in a legally significant way?
- What do the injuries show?
- What do the recordings show?
- And does the evidence raise a legally valid claim of self-defense?
An assault case should not be decided merely by determining who suffered the most visible injury.
The law also asks why force was used, what threat existed when it was used, and whether the accused was legally entitled to defend against that threat.