TexasCHLforum.com

I thought it might be interesting to do a discussion and study of TPC chapter 9 here, taking a section at a time a dissecting it. There are lots of intelligent and logical people here, and I hope to improve my understanding of chapter 9 and learn to present it better.

I always start with definitions, so I will do the same here.


§9.01. Definitions.

In this chapter:

(1) "Custody" has the meaning assigned by Section 38.01.

(2) "Escape" has the meaning assigned by Section 38.01.

(3) "Deadly force" means force that is intended or known by
the actor to cause, or in the manner of its use or intended use is
capable of causing, death or serious bodily injury.

People often think of guns when they think of deadly force. By the above definition, we can see that DF includes force that even is capable of causing serious bodily in the manner it was used.

TPC 1.07
.
.

(46) "Serious bodily injury" means bodily injury that creates
a substantial risk of death or that causes death, serious permanent
disfigurement, or protracted loss or impairment of the function of any
bodily member or organ.

So if I cut off your arm with a hatchet and you live, that caused serious bodily injury; therefore, it was deadly force (DF).

If I hit you in the arm with a baseball bat and break your arm that is serious bodily injury; therefore it was deadly force.

If I swing a bat at your head and you duck causing me to miss; in the manner in the use of my force it was capable of causing both death and serious bodily injury; therefore, that was deadly force.



Discussion??

I would comment that there are two types of deadly force, lawful and unlawful but as I understand it there are not different levels or degrees of DF.

there are not different levels or degrees of DF.

Hadn't thought about it quite that way, but you're right.

There is force and deadly force, but once you make the jump up from force to deadly force, you're all the way up as far as the law is concerned.

Before we move to the next section, what's everyone's take on what constitutes deadly force when a weapon is not involved.

Blow to the face with a fist?
Kick?
What else?

I have been taught and teach that blow's to the head, the throat, and spine is where DF start's, I personaly believe that a blow to the heart should be added to that list, but I am sure there are folks here that know more about this than I do.

I believe it is safe to say that we have many CHL holders that are in the same physical condition I am in. Overall active and healthy, but in our 60’s, taking some type of blood thinner medication, along with other medications that might affect our ability to heal or absorb any type of punishment. This results in the fact that almost all “bodily injury� to me is “Serious bodily injury�. I truly believe this is how it would play out in the courts if I had to use deadly force to prevent someone from attacking me with their fist or open hands.
Could a robust 30 year male use this same reasoning? If not, then I must assume that we have multiple standards for “serious bodily injury�. Can we have a law with multiple standards that is still “fair�? I’ll leave this for you experts to explain.

There are two types of force and deadly force. That which you think is force and/or deadly force and that which a jury thinks is force and/or deadly force.

Houston1944
There's no place in the law that say's "fair" it uses reasonable instead and what might be reasonable for you may not be for me.

There is no definition for reasonable it will be defined case by case in the courts.

Your job when you are before the Grand Jury is to convince them that what you have done was reasonable and justified by chapter 9 of the PC.
if you can't it become's your attorneys job when you are true billed.

We can't learn enough about Chapter 9 since this is where we are going to look for justification for our action's.

TX, I think this is a great idea and I look forward to getting everyone's different view's on Ch. 9.

one eyed fatman wrote:There are two types of force and deadly force. That which you think is force and/or deadly force and that which a jury thinks is force and/or deadly force.

That is not really true, and certainly not the topic of this thread.

I would be interested in entertaining a debate on perceptions, and I look forward to participating in your thread regarding such.

ElGato wrote:There's no place in the law that say's "fair" it uses reasonable instead and what might be reasonable for you may not be for me.

There is no definition for reasonable it will be defined case by case in the courts.

Agreed.

I would respectfully request that we keep this thread on the topic of the definitions listed.

I will later post threads on each section of chapter 9, and we can dissect them, including reasonableness, in those threads.

Fair?

Thanks.

JohnKSa wrote:
Before we move to the next section, what's everyone's take on what constitutes deadly force when a weapon is not involved.

Blow to the face with a fist?
Kick?
What else?

Always a good question. I refer back to the definition of serious bodily injury.

To borrow from a recent thread, a slap to my face would not be DF; however, a hard upper cut to my chin from a person of fair strength would be. It can cause a broken jaw (protracted loss or impairment of the function of any
bodily member) or worse.

txinvestigator wrote:

JohnKSa wrote:
Before we move to the next section, what's everyone's take on what constitutes deadly force when a weapon is not involved.

Blow to the face with a fist?
Kick?
What else?

Always a good question. I refer back to the definition of serious bodily injury.

To borrow from a recent thread, a slap to my face would not be DF; however, a hard upper cut to my chin from a person of fair strength would be. It can cause a broken jaw (protracted loss or impairment of the function of any
bodily member) or worse.

In the Gordon Hale case, the fact that Mr. Hale suffered a partially detached retina after being punched by Kenny Tavai, showed that Tavai had used deadly force, justifying Hale's use of DF in return.

Kevin

KBCraig wrote:

txinvestigator wrote:

JohnKSa wrote:
Before we move to the next section, what's everyone's take on what constitutes deadly force when a weapon is not involved.

Blow to the face with a fist?
Kick?
What else?

Always a good question. I refer back to the definition of serious bodily injury.

To borrow from a recent thread, a slap to my face would not be DF; however, a hard upper cut to my chin from a person of fair strength would be. It can cause a broken jaw (protracted loss or impairment of the function of any
bodily member) or worse.

In the Gordon Hale case, the fact that Mr. Hale suffered a partially detached retina after being punched by Kenny Tavai, showed that Tavai had used deadly force, justifying Hale's use of DF in return.

Kevin

Thats true, in fact, when I teach classes I use that example. I ask if Tavai's blows were deadly force (this is after defining deadly force). Someone always says no, or that "it depends". I jokingly offer for them to come up front and let me pound on their head for a while and then answer me. LOL

the fact that Mr. Hale suffered a partially detached retina after being punched by Kenny Tavai, showed that Tavai had used deadly force, justifying Hale's use of DF in return

Wow, that's not exactly what one wants to hear.

That sounds suspiciously like one must suffer a serious injury from an unarmed attack to justify using deadly force...

txinvestigator wrote:

one eyed fatman wrote:There are two types of force and deadly force. That which you think is force and/or deadly force and that which a jury thinks is force and/or deadly force.

That is not really true, and certainly not the topic of this thread.

I would be interested in entertaining a debate on perceptions, and I look forward to participating in your thread regarding such.

That is not really true, and certainly not the topic of this thread.

So your telling me that you already know what a jury is going to do when you get into an altercation? I hope not.

I would be interested in entertaining a debate on perceptions

Were doing that now.