## Facts

- John Hughes was involved in an ongoing conflict with Rodney Johnson.
- Mary Hodge drove with Hughes and Joan Goodwin as passengers when Johnson passed them, turned around, and followed.
- Mary pulled over; Hughes and Goodwin exited to speak with Johnson.
- Goodwin testified that Johnson cursed Hughes, grabbed Goodwin, and threatened her with a gun.
- Hughes shot and killed Johnson and was indicted for murder.
- At trial, the case centered on justification for deadly force in defense of a third person under Tex. Penal Code § 9.33 and its cross-reference to §§ 9.31–9.32.

## Issues

1. Whether, under Tex. Penal Code §§ 9.32 and 9.33, a jury may be instructed that deadly force in defense of a third person is justified only if a reasonable person in the actor’s position would not have retreated.

## Decision

- The Court of Criminal Appeals affirmed the intermediate appellate court’s reversal.
- The court held the trial court erred by including a “reasonable person would not have retreated” condition in the defense-of-third-person instruction.
- The conviction for voluntary manslaughter was reversed, and the case was remanded for further proceedings.

## Legal Principles

- Under Tex. Penal Code § 9.33, a person is justified in using force or deadly force to protect a third person if (1) under circumstances as the actor reasonably believes them to be, the actor would be justified under § 9.31 or § 9.32 in using such force to protect himself against the unlawful force he believes threatens the third person, and (2) the actor reasonably believes intervention is immediately necessary.
- In applying § 9.33, the actor’s justification turns on apparent necessity and whether the third person would apparently be justified in using self-defense; the actor “stands in the shoes” of the person protected.
- A defense-of-third-person instruction should not impose an additional, independent retreat requirement based on the defender’s own opportunity to withdraw; layering retreat onto § 9.33 conflicts with the statute’s “immediately necessary” requirement.
- A jury charge that misstates the statutory elements of a justification defense by adding an extra condition not required by § 9.33 constitutes charge error warranting reversal.

## Conclusion

The court ruled that Texas’s defense-of-third-person statute authorizes deadly force when the actor reasonably believes immediate intervention is necessary and the protected person would apparently be justified in using deadly force; the jury may not be required to find that the defender independently lacked a reasonable opportunity to retreat.


Hughes v. State, 719 S.W.2d 560 (Tex. Crim. App. 1986)