Opinion ID: 1345019
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: The Texas Assault Tort and Statutory Privilege

Text: In Texas, the intentional tort of assault is identical to criminal assault. See Hall v. Sonic Drive-In of Angleton, Inc., 177 S.W.3d 636, 649 (Tex.App.Houston [1st Dist.] 2005, pet. denied) (The elements of assault are the same in both the criminal and civil context[s].). Texas Penal Code § 22.01(a) provides, in relevant part, that a person commits criminal assault if he: (1) intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly causes bodily injury to another ...; (2) intentionally or knowingly threatens another with imminent bodily injury ...; or (3) intentionally or knowingly causes physical contact with another when the person knows or should reasonably believe that the other will regard the contact as offensive or provocative. TEX. PENAL CODE ANN. § 22.01(a) (Vernon 2005). The Texas Penal Code also provides a civil privilege defense to an assault claim. Specifically, § 9.51(a) provides: (a) A peace officer ... is justified in using force against another when and to the degree the actor reasonably believes the force is immediately necessary to make or assist in making an arrest or search ... if: (1) the actor reasonably believes the arrest or search is lawful or, if the arrest or search is made under a warrant, he reasonably believes the warrant is valid; and (2) before using force, the actor manifests his purpose to arrest or search and identifies himself as a peace officer..., unless he reasonably believes his purpose and identity are already known by or cannot reasonably be made known to the person to be arrested. Id. § 9.51(a); see also Tex. Dep't of Pub. Safety v. Petta, 44 S.W.3d 575, 579-80 (Tex.2001) (holding that the elements of a criminal necessity defense under § 9.51 are the same as the civil privilege defense). [1]