Can Self-Defense Be Used Against an Aggravated Assault Charge?
Being charged with aggravated assault does not necessarily mean that a person acted unlawfully.
Some aggravated assault cases begin with a confrontation in which the accused maintains that they were protecting themselves or another person. The fact that someone was seriously injured or that a weapon was involved does not automatically eliminate the possibility of self-defense.
Under Texas law, self-defense may be available in an aggravated assault case when the legal requirements for justified force or deadly force are met. Whether it applies depends heavily on the circumstances surrounding the confrontation.
What Is Aggravated Assault in Texas?
Under Texas law, aggravated assault generally occurs when someone commits an assault and either:
Causes serious bodily injury to another person, or
Uses or exhibits a deadly weapon during the assault.
Aggravated assault is generally a second-degree felony, although certain circumstances can elevate the offense to a first-degree felony.
Because aggravated assault can involve serious injuries or weapons, the consequences of a conviction can be substantial.
But prosecutors still must prove that the conduct was criminal. If the accused was legally justified in using force, self-defense can become a central issue in the case.
Can You Claim Self-Defense Against Aggravated Assault?
Potentially, yes.
Texas law generally permits a person to use force against another when and to the degree the person reasonably believes that force is immediately necessary to protect against another person's use or attempted use of unlawful force.
Consider a confrontation in which one person attacks another. The person being attacked responds with force and the attacker suffers a serious injury.
Prosecutors might focus on the injury and pursue an aggravated assault charge.
The defense, however, may focus on what caused the accused to use force in the first place.
The key questions may become:
Who initiated the confrontation?
What threat did the accused face?
Was the other person using or attempting to use unlawful force?
Was the need to respond immediate?
Was the accused trying to protect themselves?
Was the amount of force legally justified?
Was a weapon involved?
What evidence supports each person's version of events?
The answers can determine whether the use of force was criminal or legally justified.
What If a Deadly Weapon Was Used?
Many aggravated assault cases involve allegations that a deadly weapon was used or exhibited.
A weapon allegation can make the case more serious, but the presence of a weapon does not automatically prevent someone from raising self-defense.
Instead, it becomes particularly important to determine whether the circumstances justified the level of force used.
Texas law distinguishes between ordinary force and deadly force. Deadly force may be justified in self-defense when the person would otherwise be justified in using force and reasonably believes deadly force is immediately necessary to protect against another person's use or attempted use of unlawful deadly force or to prevent certain specified serious crimes.
For example, a person accused of using a weapon may argue that the other person was attacking them with deadly force and that their response was necessary to protect themselves.
The specific facts become extremely important.
What Counts as a Deadly Weapon?
A deadly weapon allegation does not necessarily involve a firearm.
Depending on how an object was allegedly used, prosecutors may claim that knives or other objects qualify as deadly weapons.
This means the defense may need to examine both what the object was and how it was allegedly used.
Questions can include whether the accused actually possessed the object, whether it was displayed or used during the confrontation, what threat existed at the time and whether witnesses agree about what occurred.
What If the Other Person Was Seriously Injured?
Serious bodily injury is another way an assault allegation can become aggravated assault.
But the severity of an injury does not by itself answer the self-defense question.
Imagine that someone is attacked and uses force to stop the attack. If the aggressor suffers a serious injury during the confrontation, prosecutors may still investigate whether aggravated assault occurred.
The defense may argue that the injury resulted from force the accused was legally justified in using.
This is why the events leading up to the injury can be just as important as the injury itself.
Does the Amount of Force Used Matter?
Yes.
Texas self-defense law focuses in part on whether and to what degree a person reasonably believed force was immediately necessary.
When deadly force is involved, additional requirements apply.
That means a self-defense case may involve more than proving that the other person started the confrontation. The defense may also need to address whether the accused's response was legally justified under the circumstances.
For example, the analysis may be different when someone responds to a punch than when someone reasonably believes another person is about to use deadly force.
The entire sequence of events needs to be examined.
What If You Didn't Start the Fight?
Who initiated a confrontation can be particularly important in a self-defense case.
Texas law places limitations on self-defense when the person claiming the defense provoked the other's use or attempted use of unlawful force. The law also addresses circumstances involving someone who abandons an encounter they initially provoked and communicates that intention but the other person nevertheless continues using or attempting to use unlawful force.
In a real criminal case, determining who started a confrontation may not be simple.
Both people may claim the other person was the aggressor.
Witnesses may disagree.
Video may capture only part of the encounter.
The defense may therefore need to reconstruct what happened before force was used.
Can Words Alone Justify Using Force?
Generally, verbal provocation alone does not justify the use of force under Texas self-defense law.
An argument, insult or angry statement does not automatically provide legal justification for physically attacking someone.
But confrontations can change rapidly.
An argument may begin verbally and then become physical. In that situation, the critical question may be when the encounter changed from words into an actual or attempted use of unlawful force.
Witness testimony, recordings and other evidence may help establish that sequence.
Do You Have to Retreat Before Defending Yourself?
Texas law provides circumstances in which a person is not required to retreat before using otherwise justified deadly force.
Generally, the person must have a right to be present at the location, must not have provoked the person against whom deadly force is used and must not be engaged in criminal activity at the time.
However, the lack of a duty to retreat does not create an unlimited right to use force.
The requirements for lawful self-defense or deadly force still must be satisfied.
Can You Defend Someone Else Against an Attack?
Yes, Texas law also recognizes defense of a third person under certain circumstances.
This can become relevant in an aggravated assault case when someone becomes involved in a confrontation because they believe another person is in immediate danger.
For example, someone may intervene because they believe a spouse, child, friend or another person is being attacked.
Texas law allows force or deadly force to protect a third person when the statutory requirements are met, including that the person reasonably believes intervention is immediately necessary.
In these cases, the defense may focus on what the accused reasonably believed was happening to the other person at the time.
What Evidence Can Support Self-Defense?
Aggravated assault cases involving self-defense frequently come down to competing accounts of the same confrontation.
Independent evidence can therefore be extremely important.
Evidence may include:
Surveillance footage
Cellphone videos
Police body-camera footage
911 recordings
Photographs
Medical records
Witness statements
Text messages
Social media communications
Physical evidence from the scene
Evidence involving an alleged weapon
Injuries suffered by the accused
Statements made by the alleged victim
Evidence showing who initiated the confrontation
Evidence showing injuries to the person accused of aggravated assault can be particularly important if it supports their claim that they were being attacked.
What If Both People Say They Were Acting in Self-Defense?
This happens.
Two people can provide completely different versions of a physical confrontation, with each claiming the other person started it.
An investigation may then need to determine which account is supported by independent evidence.
Where were the people standing? Who approached whom? Who used force first? Did someone attempt to leave? What do witnesses remember? Do the injuries match the accounts given to police?
A criminal defense attorney may look beyond the initial police report to determine whether additional evidence provides a different picture of what happened.
What If You Were Arrested at the Scene?
Being arrested does not determine whether a self-defense claim is valid.
Police officers responding to an assault call frequently arrive after the physical confrontation has ended. They may have to make decisions based on statements from the people involved, visible injuries and limited information.
Additional evidence may later become available.
Surveillance footage might show how the confrontation started. Other witnesses may be identified. Body-camera footage may reveal statements made immediately afterward. Text messages may provide context about events leading up to the encounter.
An independent defense investigation can therefore be particularly important when self-defense is disputed.
Can Aggravated Assault Charges Be Dismissed Based on Self-Defense?
Self-defense can potentially provide a defense to an aggravated assault prosecution, but the outcome of any case depends on its specific facts and evidence.
A defense attorney may present evidence of self-defense to prosecutors, challenge whether the State can prove its case, negotiate regarding the charges or present a self-defense argument at trial when appropriate.
The important point is that an aggravated assault charge does not automatically establish that the accused's use of force was unlawful.
The surrounding circumstances must be examined.
Self-Defense Can Change an Aggravated Assault Case
When someone is accused of aggravated assault after a physical confrontation, focusing only on the injury or alleged weapon may tell only part of the story.
The defense may need to determine why force was used, who initiated the confrontation, what threat existed and what the accused reasonably believed was happening at that moment.
Larry Bloomquist is Board Certified in Criminal Law and has more than 20 years of criminal law experience. As a former prosecutor and experienced criminal trial attorney, he represents individuals accused of assault, aggravated assault and other serious offenses where self-defense may be an important part of the case.
Larry represents clients in San Antonio, New Braunfels and surrounding Central Texas communities.
If you have been accused of aggravated assault after defending yourself or another person, contact Larry Bloomquist to discuss the circumstances of your case: https://www.sacrimelaw.com/contact
Comments