9.18 Defendant’s
Verbal Provocation as Insufficient Justification
Comment
The Committee considered but rejected the proposition
that Texas Penal Code section 9.31(b)(1) means that provocation
bars self-defense only if that provocation goes beyond mere verbal
provocation. This appears to have been pre-1974 law, but the Committee
was convinced the 1974 revision abandoned that position.
If the law is otherwise, this proposition might be best accommodated
by including in the instruction the following:
Force against another is
not justified in response to verbal provocation alone. Therefore,
if the evidence shows only that the defend-ant verbally provoked
the use or attempted use of force against him, this alone does not
constitute provocation by the defendant sufficient to render self-defense
inapplicable.
As noted more fully in CPJC 9.4, be aware that an appellate
court might consider such an instruction to be an inappropriate
comment on the weight of the evidence.
Comment
The Committee considered but rejected the proposition that Texas Penal Code section 9.31(b)(1) means that provocation bars self-defense only if that provocation goes beyond mere verbal provocation. This appears to have been pre-1974 law, but the Committee was convinced the 1974 revision abandoned that position.
If the law is otherwise, this proposition might be best accommodated by including in the instruction the following:
Force against another is not justified in response to verbal provocation alone. Therefore, if the evidence shows only that the defend-ant verbally provoked the use or attempted use of force against him, this alone does not constitute provocation by the defendant sufficient to render self-defense inapplicable.
As noted more fully in CPJC 9.4, be aware that an appellate court might consider such an instruction to be an inappropriate comment on the weight of the evidence.