TX: One less car burglar

[philip964]

http://www.click2houston.com/news/homeo ... icials-say

Story says 5 am so that's at night. It was outside, but homeowner was stopping a burglary. So sounds like the homeowner would not be charged with anything.

[RPBrown]

"The Homeowner went outside and started shooting"

They spin it so it sounds like he just walked out the door and started shooting. I would almost bet there was some verbal communication made. If not, I would think there should have been. Not required, but I would think that most people would say something to the BG before using deadly force, ie. stop, get on the ground, is that truck worth your life, etc.

Then again, maybe its just me.

[Keith B]

Burglary of an unoccupied motor vehicle under TPC 30.04 is only a Class A misdemeanor unless they have been convicted of the same crime two previous times. The fact it was potentially theft during night time may help with the justification in TPC 9.42, but it has to be proven the intent was theft of the vehicle or other items. Criminal mischief also has justification, but again, the intent is going to be the issue. Will be interesting to see how this plays out.

[vjallen75]

"The Homeowner went outside and started shooting"

They spin it so it sounds like he just walked out the door and started shooting. I would almost bet there was some verbal communication made. If not, I would think there should have been. Not required, but I would think that most people would say something to the BG before using deadly force, ie. stop, get on the ground, is that truck worth your life, etc.

Then again, maybe its just me.

I agree with you there should be some type of verbal warning, we will have to see how this transpires.

Burglary of an unoccupied motor vehicle under TPC 30.04 is only a Class A misdemeanor unless they have been convicted of the same crime two previous times. The fact it was potentially theft during night time may help with the justification in TPC 9.42, but it has to be proven the intent was theft of the vehicle or other items. Criminal mischief also has justification, but again, the intent is going to be the issue. Will be interesting to see how this plays out.

Does the criminal mischief have to be at night time as well? I don't see the justification of someone just looking in your car during the middle of the day.

[Keith B]

[
Does the criminal mischief have to be at night time as well? I don't see the justification of someone just looking in your car during the middle of the day.

Yes. Read TPC 9.42

Sec. 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.

[saltydog452]

Yeah, but...

Why would it be necessary to allow the would be thief time and motivation to shoot you DRT? I'd assume that the would be thief would be armed and reluctant to get involved with the Texas Penal System. Dunno if I'd allow the BG that much time. Maybe the assumption is that, if warned, the BG would cease whatever he (she) was doing.

[dlh]

I looked at the wording of Section 9.42 and came up with this hypothetical:

BG is keying your car (criminal mischief) at night and you come running outside with your handgun...He sees you, drops the key, yells "I am outta here!" and starts running away. You shoot him...Apparently you are not justified...The wording of the statute say you can shoot the BG only during the commission of that offense and not while they are running away...Have not briefed the case law, if any. Note you can shoot them while they are fleeing if they have committed the other crimes mentioned---arson, burglary, robbery, etc.

Scratches head...

[The Wall]

I looked at the wording of Section 9.42 and came up with this hypothetical:

BG is keying your car (criminal mischief) at night and you come running outside with your handgun...He sees you, drops the key, yells "I am outta here!" and starts running away. You shoot him...Apparently you are not justified...The wording of the statute say you can shoot the BG only during the commission of that offense and not while they are running away...Have not briefed the case law, if any. Note you can shoot them while they are fleeing if they have committed the other crimes mentioned---arson, burglary, robbery, etc.

Scratches head...

The way I read it the thief would have to be carrying the car with him while running away to justify deadly force.

(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;

[Keith B]

Article now says 57yo homeowner got into an altercation with the 27yo suspect and the suspect was shot one time.

[Pariah3j]

Article now says 57yo homeowner got into an altercation with the 27yo suspect and the suspect was shot one time.

Wonder if it was a verbal or physical altercation ?

spotted the man inside the truck, called 911 and went out with a gun.

^I missed this part the first time reading, the news Video is almost misleading/lacking key details and I suspect they were were trying to suggest that people were dismayed that there was a shooting, but the interviews were more people worried about being broke into.

Having broken into the truck is different then just attempting to break in isn't it ? (legally speaking ?) Catching him in the vehicle means the person was caught in the act of committing burglary, and would be reasonable to believe the person may have taken something.

edit: forgot to respond to the section I quoted of Keith's .

[rotor]

An alternative punishment.

[loscar141]

I wouldn't shoot someone breaking into my car unless I was in danger. I would call the cops and let them handle it and call insurance to take care of anything eles, I have full coverage, But I don't want this homeowner to get in trouble for what he did. Everyone has the right to protect their life and property.

[mjoplin]

I remember my original CHL instructor's take on this years ago. He was a deputy for Harris County. His advise, if someone wants your car, let them have it and take the insurance check. While it didn't apply here, if you shoot someone in the car, it is impounded in a lot in Houston heat, things percolate inside,... you get the rest. There is no amount of cleaning, upholstery replacement, etc. that will remedy the odor.

Car's replaceable. But, one less bad guy in this story!

[Javier730]

I would not shoot someone who was breaking into my car at night. I would probably slam the door a few times if he was halfway in though.