TexasCHLforum.com

Investigators said the homeowner heard some commotion, walked outside and spotted a man with a shovel trying to break into his car, so he opened fire, shooting the suspect.

§ 9.42. DEADLY FORCE TO PROTECT PROPERTY. A person is
justified in using deadly force against another to protect land or
tangible, movable property:
(1) if he would be justified in using force against the
other under Section 9.41; and
(2) when and to the degree he reasonably believes the
deadly force is immediately necessary:
(A) to prevent the other's imminent commission of
arson, burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, theft during the
nighttime, or criminal mischief during the nighttime; or
(B) to prevent the other who is fleeing
immediately after committing burglary, robbery, aggravated
robbery, or theft during the nighttime from escaping with the
property; and
(3) he reasonably believes that:
(A) the land or property cannot be protected or
recovered by any other means; or
(B) the use of force other than deadly force to
protect or recover the land or property would expose the actor or
another to a substantial risk of death or serious bodily injury.

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

Teamless wrote:Not sure I could shoot someone for breaking in my car

(1) if he would be justified in using force against the
other under Section 9.41; and
(2) when and to the degree he reasonably believes the
deadly force is immediately necessary:
(A) to prevent the other's imminent commission of arson, burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, theft during the nighttime, or criminal mischief during the nighttime;

AEA wrote:

(1) if he would be justified in using force against the
other under Section 9.41; and
(2) when and to the degree he reasonably believes the
deadly force is immediately necessary:
(A) to prevent the other's imminent commission of arson, burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, theft during the nighttime, or criminal mischief during the nighttime;

Happened at 6am.
Still dark.

I believe he is OK and that this should send a strong message to those that commit crimes at nighttime.

Valor wrote:

AEA wrote:

(1) if he would be justified in using force against the
other under Section 9.41; and
(2) when and to the degree he reasonably believes the
deadly force is immediately necessary:
(A) to prevent the other's imminent commission of arson, burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, theft during the nighttime, or criminal mischief during the nighttime;

Happened at 6am.
Still dark.

I believe he is OK and that this should send a strong message to those that commit crimes at nighttime.

In full agreement of your assessment. Hope the grand jury see it the same.

2firfun50 wrote:

Valor wrote:

AEA wrote:

(1) if he would be justified in using force against the
other under Section 9.41; and
(2) when and to the degree he reasonably believes the
deadly force is immediately necessary:
(A) to prevent the other's imminent commission of arson, burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, theft during the nighttime, or criminal mischief during the nighttime;

Happened at 6am.
Still dark.

I believe he is OK and that this should send a strong message to those that commit crimes at nighttime.

In full agreement of your assessment. Hope the grand jury see it the same.

Sunrise was not until 6:41 am in Houston.

Houston police said the homeowner was in the country illegally and owned a gun, which is against the law.

JJVP wrote:

Houston police said the homeowner was in the country illegally and owned a gun, which is against the law.

I think he will end up in jail. IMO, he was justified on the shooting. However, being illegal with a gun is another story. On the other hand, since the Feds think that illegals have more rights than the rest of us, maybe he will be given a medal.

(3) he reasonably believes that:
(A) the land or property cannot be protected or
recovered by any other means;