Texas House Bill HB1035

Texas 2021 - 87th Regular

Caption

Relating to the use of force by peace officers and certain other persons to make an arrest or search or prevent an escape from custody.

Impact

With the revisions made by HB 1035, the bill is expected to have significant implications for law enforcement protocols and the legal protections for officers. It lays out a clearer legal basis for the justification of deadly force, particularly if there is a reasonable belief that the person being arrested poses a significant risk of harm. This could potentially influence the actions taken by law enforcement in high-stakes situations, shifting the balance towards increased authority for officers when dealing with suspected felons. Moreover, it emphasizes the necessity for peace officers to announce their intent and identity when making arrests, which can be crucial in developing transparency in law enforcement practices.

Summary

House Bill 1035 addresses the legal framework governing the use of force by peace officers and certain other individuals in Texas. The bill aims to clarify when peace officers and persons acting under their direction are justified in using force to make an arrest or prevent an escape from custody. Specifically, it modifies Sections 9.51 and 9.52 of the Penal Code, elaborating on the conditions under which the use of force, including deadly force, is deemed reasonable and necessary. This includes stipulations that an arrest must be lawful and the individual must identify themselves as a peace officer or a person acting under their direction before deploying force.

Contention

While proponents of HB 1035 argue that it supports law enforcement efforts by providing necessary clarity and protections to officers using force in the line of duty, opponents express concern regarding the potential for misuse of deadly force under the expanded provisions. Critics fear that the broadened criteria for justifying deadly force might lead to excessive violence, particularly in encounters involving unarmed individuals. The debate highlights a broader discourse on the appropriate limits of police power and the imperative for accountability measures to ensure public safety and civil rights.