TEXAS CRIMINAL PATTERN JURY CHARGES

Jessie R. Allen

Hon. Robert Edward Cadena

Hon. Robb David Catalano

Eduardo Cortes

Alan Keith Curry

Alison Fox Dahlberg

Neal Andrew Davis

Christopher J. Downey

Laurie K. English

Andrew Douglas Fletcher

Ryan Withington Gertz

Douglas Ross Gladden

R. David Holmes

Susan Riva Klein

Prof. Jennifer E. Laurin

Elizabeth Marian Ponce McClain

James Gerard McDermott II

Leland Michael Moorehead

Clint Morgan

F. David Ortiz

Scott Pawgan

Tiana Jean Sanford

Eve Schatelowitz

Hon. Benjamin N. Smith

Brock C. Akers

Scott Armstrong

Hon. Scott Brister

Jerry D. Bullard

Kirsten Castañeda

Rabeea Sultan Collier

J. Christopher Dean

Christopher Benjamin Dove

Michael Eady

Hon. Laurie Eiserloh

Marcus Esther

Hon. April Farris

Hon. Titiana D. Frausto

Stewart Gagnon

Hon. Melissa Goodwin

Mary Taylor Henderson

Hon. Daniel E. Hinde

Jay Jackson

David C. Kent

Jeffrey S. Levinger

Daryl L. Moore

Hon. Robert Schaffer

Hon. Hyattye O. Simmons

Michael L. Slack

Carlos Ramon Soltero

Hon. Bonnie Sudderth

Hon. Timothy Sulak

Lori I. Valenzuela

Hon. Andrew A. Wright

State Bar of Texas

2026-2027

G. David Smith, President

Steve Chiscano, Chair of the Board

Jeff Work, Chair, Board Professional Development Subcommittee

Mark C. Walker, Chair, Committee on Continuing Legal Education

Trey Apffel, Executive Director

Texas Bar Books

Sharon Sandle, Director

Elma E. Garcia, Assistant Director

Nicholas B. Goddard, Project Publications Attorney

Robert C. Cable, Publications Attorney

Liane Jarvis Cooper, Publications Attorney

Elizabeth Floreani, Publications Attorney

Roger Siebert, Senior Editor

Courtney Cavaliere, Editor

Lexi Clidienst, Editor

Casey Ellis, Editor

Jill Hoefling, Business Manager

Edward Morgan, Operations Manager

Travis Riddle, Production Supervisor

Jennifer Townsend, Production and Editorial Assistant

Holly Reddehase, Meeting Coordinator

Lara Talkington, Marketing Coordinator

Kevin Henderson II, Website Manager

Jennifer Karlsson, Web Content Specialist

Otto Nicli, Web Content Specialist

Jennifer Perez, Web Content Specialist

Lenila Carreno, Accounting Specialist

Preface

The Pattern Jury Charges Committee—Criminal was first formed in 2005 with the goal of drafting criminal instructions in plain language. The Committee was challenged with addressing both the need to state the law in statutory terms and the need to provide charges in language juries could understand. To this end, the Committee designed an outline for the charges that explicitly states the relevant statutes and legal definitions and then applies the law to the facts in commonsense language. Each section is clearly identified, and the format was designed to enhance readability for the jury.

Once this template was developed, the Committee drafted the first volume: Texas Criminal Pattern Jury Charges—Intoxication and Controlled Substances. The Committee was then able to produce four more volumes at a rapid pace. In 2015, the series was expanded and reorganized for greater utility and room for further expansion.

In 2020, the Committee revisited the template it initially adopted. Importantly, it renewed its commitment to using a format and language that enhance juror understanding. It continued what it believed were the Committee’s most significant contributions—its culpable mental state definitions (tailored to a specific element, not a category like “result” or “circumstances”) and the numbered list of elements in its application of law to facts unit. Based on the advice of highly experienced members, judges, and other practitioners, the Committee also streamlined the charge template. In particular, it eliminated the potential confusion that might occur from conveying the elements of the offense in several different ways throughout the charge, notably in its accusation and relevant statutes units. The result is shorter and less repetitive instructions for the jury. And in 2022, with technical support and implementation by Texas Bar Books, the pattern charges moved to a fully online format—with the aim of providing even greater functionality and ease of use.

As with the initial set of volumes, the Committee still provides in its commentary a significant amount of material on the underlying law to aid practitioners in using the charges. This varies from the style of the civil charges. But precisely because the Committee’s approach is significantly different from that of more traditional criminal charges, the Committee felt it was important to ensure the attorney had all the information needed to use the charges with confidence.

This work could not have been completed without the commitment, dedication, and experience of many Committee members, both past and present. These members have volunteered their time to read hundreds of pages before meetings and participated in hours of (sometimes contentious) discussion so that the pattern charges will be both balanced and accurate. They have volunteered to keep sections of our materials up to date with case law and legislative changes, and a particularly dedicated group of members have also drafted charges on the Committee’s behalf. The Committee is especially indebted to Professor George Dix, who made this jury charge project possible in the first place and whose contributions and leadership continued to sustain it for more than a decade. The Committee is also grateful to Judge Kevin Yeary for his long-time support as a liaison to the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, to the numerous other lawyers and judges who have offered ideas for improvement, and to the staff of Texas Bar Books, who provide the careful editing and other invaluable assistance that have made this online publication a reality.

—Emily Johnson-Liu and James McDermott, Co-Chairs

Introduction

1. Purpose of Publication

   
   

   The purpose of this product is to assist the bench and bar in preparing the court's charge in jury cases. It provides general instructions for the guilt/innocence stage of the trial and instructions covering the most commonly used offenses and defenses. The jury instructions are suggestions and guides to be used by a trial court if they are applicable and proper in a specific case. Of course, the exercise of professional judgment by the attorneys and the judge is necessary in every case.

2. Scope of Pattern Charges

   
   

   A charge should conform to the pleadings and evidence of the particular case. Occasions will arise for the use of instructions not specifically addressed herein. Even for the specific instructions that are addressed in this product, trial judges and practitioners should recognize that the Committee may have erred in its perceptions and that its recommendations may be affected by future appellate decisions and statutory changes.

3. Principles of Style

   
   

   1. Basic philosophy. This product embodies the Committee's recommendation that several basic and reasonable changes can and should be made to how juries are instructed in criminal trials. Although they are the result of long and careful consideration by members drawn from the bench, prosecutors' offices, defense practice, and academia, the jury instructions in this product have no official status. Appellate courts are unlikely to regard trial judges' refusal to use the Committee's jury instructions as reversible error. These instructions will be used, then, only if trial judges are willing to exercise their considerable discretion to adopt them in particular cases.

   
   

   2. Simplicity. Criminal litigation by its nature often raises difficult questions for juries to resolve. Compound that difficulty with the current practice of drafting instructions almost verbatim from the statutes, occasionally inherently ambiguous themselves, and an onerous task lies ahead of juries. The Committee concluded that plain language in criminal jury instructions is both desirable and permissible and has therefore sought to be as brief as possible and to use language that is simple and easy to understand.

   
   

   3. Bracketed material. Several types of bracketed material appear in the jury instructions. In a bracketed statement such as “[indictment/information],” the user must choose between the terms or phrases within the brackets. The choices are separated by forward slash marks. Alternative letters or phrases may also be indicated by the use of brackets. For example, “county[ies]” indicates a choice between the words “county” and “counties.” In a bracketed statement such as “[name of accomplice],” the user is to substitute the name of the accomplice rather than retaining the bracketed material verbatim. Material such as “[include if applicable: . . .]” and “[describe purpose]” provides guidelines for completing the finished jury instruction and should not be retained verbatim in the document.

   
   

   4. Use of masculine gender. For simplicity, the jury instructions in this product use masculine pronouns. These pronouns are not enclosed in brackets, but the user should, when drafting jury instructions for a particular case, replace the pronouns with feminine versions wherever appropriate. The jury instructions in this product do, however, use disjunctive pairs of masculine and feminine pronouns when the identity of a person will not be known at the time the instructions are given to the jury (for example, “have your foreperson sign his or her name”).

4. Comments and Citations of Authority

   
   

   The discussions and comments accompanying each jury instruction provide a ready reference to the law that serves as a foundation for the instruction. The primary authorities cited in this product are the Texas Penal Code, the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure, and Texas case law.

5. Using the Pattern Jury Charges

   
   

   For general guidelines on drafting a criminal jury charge, refer to the section titled “Quick Guide to Drafting a Jury Charge,” which follows this introduction. For matters specific to any instruction, refer to the commentary in chapter 1, any general commentary that begins the chapter containing the instruction in question, and the commentary specific to and following the instruction itself. Finally, preparation of a proper charge requires careful legal analysis and sound judgment. As much as possible, chapters of the Texas Criminal Pattern Jury Charges Online are organized to match the subject matter of chapters within the Texas Penal Code. Please note, however, that individual CPJC numbers do not necessarily match the specific section number in the Penal Code where a topic is covered.

6. Future Revisions

   
   

   The contents of the jury instructions depend on the underlying substantive law relevant to the case. The Committee expects to publish updates as needed to reflect changes and new developments in the law.

Quick Guide to Drafting a Jury Charge

The Main Charge

• Examine the indictment to determine the relevant Texas Penal Code provisions.
• Compare the language of the offense or offenses charged in the indictment with the language of the relevant Penal Code provisions. In general, the indictment should track the statutory language, alleging all the elements of a particular offense or offenses.
• For each count in the indictment, determine what the elements of the offense are. Even if the indictment does not allege all the elements of an offense, the jury charge must do so. If the indictment alleges more than the Penal Code provision requires, it may be possible to omit the unnecessary language in the jury charge.
• With few exceptions, all offenses require both forbidden conduct and one or more culpable mental states. Some offenses also require a certain result—for example, homicide, which requires that the defendant's conduct cause a result, death (see Tex. Penal Code § 19.01). Still other offenses include a circumstance surrounding conduct. For example, aggravated assault of a public servant under Tex. Penal Code § 22.02(b)(2)(B) requires that the person assaulted be a public servant, a circumstance surrounding conduct, as well as requiring the forbidden conduct and a proscribed result. For each offense you submit to the jury, then, you must ask:
  1. What is the forbidden conduct?
  2. Does the offense require a certain result?
  3. Does the offense include one or more circumstances surrounding conduct?
• Next determine what culpable mental states are required to commit the offense. A culpable mental state may be required as to conduct, a result, a circumstance surrounding conduct, or all these elements. For example, in the case of aggravated assault of a public servant, when bodily injury is alleged, the defendant must intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly cause a result, bodily injury. The statute also requires, however, that the state prove that the defendant knew the victim was a public servant—a circumstance surrounding conduct. In most cases, the statutory provision itself will indicate which culpable mental states apply, but sometimes case law will dictate that a culpable mental state not expressly included in the statute is also required. Finally, you must be careful to confine each culpable mental state to the element to which it applies. For example, in the case of injury to a child, the relevant culpable mental states apply to the result, not the conduct (see Tex. Penal Code § 22.04(a); Haggins v. State, 785 S.W.2d 827 (Tex. Crim. App. 1990)).
• Many offenses may be committed in more than one statutory manner. For example, injury to a child may be committed by either an affirmative act—for example, hitting the child—or by an omission—for example, failing to provide medical care (see Tex. Penal Code § 22.04(a)). For each offense in the indictment, you must ask whether the state has alleged alternative statutory theories of how the offense was committed. If so, you will submit these theories to the jury in the disjunctive. The jurors must be unanimous that the state has proved the offense, but they need not be unanimous about the specific statutory manner. Do not, however, submit a theory to the jury if it (1) is not alleged in the indictment or (2) is not supported by the evidence adduced at trial.
• Other offenses define distinct statutory acts or results, and the jury must be unanimous on the specific act or result. For example, simple assault may be committed by causing bodily injury or by threatening another with imminent bodily injury (see Tex. Penal Code § 22.01(a)(1), (2)). These are separate and distinct criminal acts, so the jury must be unanimous about which act the defendant committed. You should not submit these acts in the disjunctive unless you also inform the jury that it must be unanimous about one specific act.
• If the indictment contains multiple counts, determine whether the state is seeking a conviction on each count or has alleged them in the alternative—for example, capital murder under Tex. Penal Code § 19.03 in the first count and murder under Tex. Penal Code § 19.02 in the second count. The jury must not be allowed to convict the defendant for two offenses when one is a lesser included offense of the other.
• Determine which unanimity instruction to give. In general, the rule is that when the state is alleging that the defendant committed one offense in one of two or more ways, the jury need not be unanimous—for example, sexual assault by penetration with the penis or a finger. In contrast, when the state is alleging that the defendant committed one of two or more acts, each of which could constitute a separate offense, the jury must be unanimous as to which act was committed—for example, sexual assault by penetration of the sexual organ or the anus of the victim (see Tex. Penal Code § 22.011(a)(1)(A)).

Defensive Matters and Lesser Included Offenses

• On request, determine if any defenses or affirmative defenses apply in the case. If so, include them, taking care to explain to the jury which party has the burden of proof.
• On request, determine if any lesser included offense instructions should be given. Ask the party who is requesting the lesser included offense instruction to explain what evidence raises that instruction.

Use of Evidence Instructions and Special Instructions

• On request, give a limiting instruction if extraneous offenses or bad acts have been introduced. Be careful to specifically identify the particular purpose for which the evidence was offered. Do not give a laundry-list instruction—for example, “intent, knowledge, scheme, plan, opportunity, or motive.”
• Determine if any special instructions, such as an instruction on accomplice witnesses or on the law of parties, should be given.
• Determine if any special issue instructions, such as a deadly weapon finding, should be included in the guilt/innocence phase instructions.

Putting the Charge Together

• Give general instructions to be included in every case and, if applicable, an instruction on the defendant's failure to testify.
• If multiple defendants are on trial, give a complete set of instructions for each defendant.
• Attach appropriate verdict forms. There should be one verdict form for each separate count or indictment that is submitted to the jury.
• Submit the proposed charge to each party for objections or special requests and modify the charge if appropriate.