Dallas Civil Lawsuit and Criminal Defense Lawyer Blog

I was sued; what do I do now? - Essential Steps to Protect Your Rights when facing a lawsuit

Jul 2

IMPORTANT: Please read the DISCLAIMER at the end prior to reading this blog.

By: Legionnaire Law Firm, PLLC

If you have been served with a lawsuit (often called a “citation” and “petition”) in Texas, it is critical to act promptly and correctly. Ignoring the lawsuit can lead to severe consequences (even if you are not liable for what you are accused of), including a default judgment entered against you without your input. This blog explains key steps to take, relevant deadlines, the risks of inaction, and why consulting a qualified and competent Texas attorney in the Dallas-Fort Worth metroplex as soon as possible is strongly recommended. While any defendant can represent themselves in court, the rules of civil procedure, the rules of evidence, and the substantive law underlying a lawsuit are technical, and self-representation often leads to many pitfalls that can be difficult or sometimes impossible to fix later.

Do Not Ignore the Lawsuit – Risk of Default Judgment

Texas courts strongly prefer that cases be resolved on the merits, but they may (and will) enter a default judgment (i.e., an “automatic” judgment in favor of your opponent) if you, as a defendant, in a lawsuit, fail to respond timely. A default judgment treats the plaintiff’s allegations as admitted and can award the full relief requested (such as money damages, injunctive relief, etc.), often without a hearing on the facts concerning liability.

Under Texas law, if you do not file a written answer or appear in court on or before the deadline to do so, the plaintiff may request (by filing a motion for default judgment) a default judgment against you, which may be granted by the court. See Tex. R. Civ. P. 239. Once signed, the judgment is enforceable and can have long-lasting effects.

Reasons why ignoring a lawsuit is particularly dangerous:

The judgment becomes final and enforceable. A plaintiff can then seek to collect the judgment from you by using court processes. If a defendant’s property is not exempt from being seized under the Texas Constitution (known as homestead protections), it may be subject to seizure and sale to satisfy the judgment. See Article XVI, Section 50 of the Texas Constitution (homestead protection).

Abstract of Judgment and Lien on Real Property. A judgment creditor (i.e., the plaintiff that obtains a default judgment against you) can obtain and file an abstract of judgment in any Texas county where you own (or later acquire) non-exempt real property. This creates a lien that attaches to that property. See Tex. Prop. Code § 52.001. Such a lien generally lasts for 10 years from the date it was recorded; however, it can be renewed. Id. § 52.006.

Post-Judgment Collection Remedies. As referenced above, judgment creditors can pursue writs of execution (to seize and sell non-exempt personal property), writs of garnishment (e.g., bank accounts), turnover orders, and more. These tools may allow aggressive collection efforts by judgment creditors willing and able to pursue them. See, e.g., Tex. R. Civ. P. 621 et seq. (execution); Tex. R. Civ. P. 657 et seq. (garnishment).

Credit and Other Impacts. The judgment can appear on credit reports, affect licensing, and create ongoing financial pressure.

Therefore, even if you believe the claim against you is without merit, failing to respond to a lawsuit waives your opportunity to contest the claim. As you can gather, default judgments carry significant weight once entered.

Your Deadlines to File an Answer Depend on the Type of Court or Type of Suit

Deadlines vary by court level and are strictly enforced.

District and County Courts (most civil cases): You must file your written answer by 10:00 a.m. on the Monday next following the expiration of 20 days after the date of service of the citation and petition. Tex. R. Civ. P. 99(b). If that Monday falls on a holiday or the courthouse is otherwise closed, it extends to the very next day that is not a holiday or court closure. See id. 4; see also In the Interest of J.M.I., 223 S.W.3d 742, 746 (Tex. App.—Amarillo 2007, no pet.) (citing Proctor v. Green, 673 S.W.2d 390, 392 (Tex. App.-Houston [1st Dist.] 1984, no writ)) (indicating that “when the last day of the 20-day period falls on a Monday, the defendant must appear by the following Monday.”).

Justice Courts (also known as Justice of the Peace, “JP” courts, or “small-claims” courts): You must file your answer by the end of the 14th day after the day you were served with the petition and citation (with extensions if that day falls on a weekend or legal holiday). See Tex. R. Civ. P. 502.5(d). Evictions, however, are different. Unlike a standard justice-court civil case, however, an eviction defendant (or tenant) (at the JP court level) may, but is not required to file a written answer with the JP court. See Tex. R. Civ. P. 510.11(a). If the eviction defendant files a written answer with the JP court, he or she must comply with the rules applicable to such answer. See id. 510.11(b).

New Deadlines for Evictions. Deadlines for evictions were recently updated. The new deadlines became effective on January 1, 2026, for all eviction lawsuits filed on or after that date. Eviction suits (also known as forcible entry and detainer or forcible detainer actions) are generally governed by Chapter 24 of the Texas Property Code. Unlike a typical justice-court civil case, an eviction defendant does not have a fixed pre-trial written-answer deadline measured from the date of service. Instead:

Upon filing the petition for eviction, the court must (generally) set a trial date that is no less than 10 days nor more than 21 days after the date the petition for eviction was filed, and it must be stated in the citation itself. Tex. Prop. Code § 24.0051(g)(1); Tex. R. Civ. P. 510.8(b)(10).
The defendant (often a tenant) must appear in person for trial on the trial date set in the citation/petition (or any rescheduled date). The defendant may, but is not required to, file a written answer on or before the trial date. Tex. R. Civ. P. 510.11(a).
No eviction trial may be held until at least 4 days after service of the citation and petition has been achieved, which is a change from the former, more lenient, 6-day minimum. See Tex. Prop. Code § 24.0051(g)(1); Tex. R. Civ. P. 510.15(b).
If the defendant fails to appear at the trial, and did not file an answer, the court may render a default judgment, taking the plaintiff’s allegations as true and granting judgment in the plaintiff’s favor. Tex. R. Civ. P. 510.16(a). And if the defendant did file an answer, yet fails to appear for the trial, the court may nonetheless proceed to hear the plaintiff’s evidence and render a judgment in the court’s discretion. Id.

As you can see, the procedures for evictions have a highly compressed timeline. From the filing of the petition, the entire matter can be set for trial in as little as 10 to 16 days (depending on when service occurred). This means defendants have far less time to prepare than in a non-eviction justice-court case, and far less time than in district and county court cases. The focus is on a prompt trial rather than extensive pre-trial motion practice or written pleading deadlines.

Furthermore, there are many other intricacies and nuances in “eviction law.” Thus, seeking advice from an experienced Texas lawyer in Dallas-Fort Worth as soon as possible if you are served with an eviction suit in the DFW metroplex is best practice. For example, there are updated notice requirements for landlords that are strictly enforced, and the failure of a landlord to comply can be used as a defense by the tenant.

A future blog will delve further into the intricacies of evictions in Texas, but, for now, you should be aware that if you are served with an eviction suit, it is highly advised that you seek legal counsel immediately. You generally cannot simply rely on “filing an answer later” in the same flexible way that might be available in a “regular” case or in a district or county court. In eviction cases, missing the required appearance (or the optional answer) risks a default judgment and issuance of a writ of possession. These rules reflect the Legislature’s and the Texas Supreme Court’s intent to provide landlords with a streamlined remedy for regaining possession while still affording tenants due-process protections.

In general, in the unfortunate event that you miss a critical deadline, and a default judgment is entered against you, you may still have options, such as filing a motion for new trial within 30 days of the judgment. See, e.g., Tex. R. Civ. P. 329b; but see, e.g., Tex. R. Civ. P. 510.8(j) (Rule applicable in eviction cases in JP court stating that no motion for new trial may be filed).[1] It may also be possible to file a motion to set aside the default judgment. In general, Texas courts apply the Craddock test for setting aside no-answer defaults, whereby (1) the failure to answer must not have been intentional or the result of conscious indifference, but due to mistake or accident; (2) the defendant sets up a meritorious defense; and (3) granting a new trial will not cause delay or injury to the plaintiff. See Tabakman v. Tabakman, 728 S.W.3d 703, 708 (Tex. 2025) (explaining Craddock doctrine established in Craddock v. Sunshine Bus lines, Inc., 133 S.W.2d 124 (Tex. 1939)). If a defendant establishes all three of these elements of the doctrine, a new trial must be granted. Id. In Tabakman, the Texas Supreme Court recently stated as follows: “[t]he overarching question guiding this inquiry is: ‘Why did the defendant not appear?’”. Tabakman, 728 S.W.3d at 708 (quoting Fid. & Guar. Ins. Co. v. Drewery Constr. Co., 186 S.W.3d 571, 574 (Tex. 2006)).

Contact a Lawyer as Soon as Practicable

The Rules of Civil Procedure, Texas statutes, and Texas case law are technical and nuanced. Deadlines, proper service requirements, affirmative defenses, discovery obligations, and potential counterclaims or jurisdictional issues can be complex. Attempting to handle it pro se (by yourself) for the first time frequently results in many important things falling through the cracks, which risks waived rights, inadmissible evidence, or procedural defaults that cannot be undone (or that are difficult and hence can be time consuming/expensive to undo). An experienced licensed Texas attorney can review and analyze the petition (lawsuit against you), advise on available defenses, ensure timely filings and meeting of deadlines, and represent you in negotiations, litigation, and trial. Early involvement often leads to better outcomes; i.e., doing it the right way from the beginning, rather than having to play “catch up” or fixing errors caused by a defendant’s lack of experience or knowledge in the legal field.

When considering whether to handle a lawsuit yourself, you should first consider multiple other areas of expertise where it makes perfect sense to hire experienced professionals to handle it for you and to assist you in such process.

For example, even though you could learn to rebuild your car’s engine yourself, it probably makes more sense to take your car to an experienced mechanic. The same thing applies to practicing law. Even though it may be possible to educate yourself about the substantive and procedural laws governing your case and to handle it on your own, that does not mean it is what you should do or that it is the most optimal or reasonable thing to attempt.

Additional Practical Tips

The following are practical tips to keep in mind should you unfortunately be on the receiving end of a lawsuit in Texas:

Seek legal counsel immediately.

Keep all related paperwork and note the exact dates relevant to each, where possible.

Do not discuss the case with the plaintiff or any of the plaintiff’s representatives (such as the plaintiff’s attorneys, insurance company adjusters, investigators, etc.) without advice from a Texas attorney.

Begin compiling all related documents, photographs, videos, and documenting potential witnesses and evidence.

Do not discuss the case or allegations on social media or other online forums, as such posted material may be discoverable by (or even required to be provided to) plaintiff or plaintiff’s attorneys. A future blog will delve further into the risks associated with posting lawsuit-related things publicly online.

Conclusion

Being sued is definitively stressful, but prompt, informed action protects your rights and interests. Do not ignore any such papers you receive. Strongly consider consulting a qualified and experienced licensed Texas attorney immediately, as procedural rules can be unforgiving, and the consequences of mistakes can last for years. Each case is unique, and early strategic legal advice is invaluable.

[1] In general, in eviction cases, a party may appeal a judgment by filing a bond, making a cash deposit, or filing a Statement of Inability to Afford Payment of Court Costs with the justice court within 5 days after the judgment is signed. Tex. R. Civ. P. 510.19(a). Moreover, a defendant or tenant who files an appeal must affirm, under penalty of perjury, the defendant’s good faith belief that the defendant has a meritorious defense and that the appeal is not for the purpose of delay, among other legal requirements. Id.

DISCLAIMER: The information in this blog is provided for informational or educational purposes only. This blog contains general information and may not reflect current legal developments. This blog (or the information in this blog): (a) is not intended to constitute legal advice; (b) does not constitute legal advice; (c) should not be construed as legal advice on any subject matter; (d) should not be a source of legal advice; and (e) does not create an attorney-client relationship between you and Legionnaire Law Firm, PLLC (or any attorney therefrom). By reading this blog, you understand and acknowledge that there is no attorney-client relationship between you and Legionnaire Law Firm, PLLC (or any attorney therefrom). Additionally, the transmission and receipt of the information contained in this blog and your access to this blog does not constitute an attorney-client relationship. Since this blog does not constitute legal advice, you should not rely upon any information contained herein for any purpose (each case, legal matter, legal proceeding, and situation is unique and different) and you should not use this blog as a substitute for competent legal advice from a licensed attorney in your state or jurisdiction. This blog and its contents are provided without warranty of any kind, either express or implied. Legionnaire Law Firm, PLLC and its attorneys expressly disclaim all liability with respect to action taken or not taken based upon any information in this blog, or with respect to any errors or omissions in this blog. Reproduction, distribution, republication, and/or retransmission of this blog is prohibited unless the prior written consent of Legionnaire Law Firm, PLLC has been obtained.

Advantages of Spanish Speaking Criminal Defense Lawyers in Texas

Jan 14, 2025

IMPORTANT: Please read the DISCLAIMER at the end prior to reading this blog.

By: Guillermo Flores, Attorney, Legionnaire Law Firm, PLLC.

If a criminal defense lawyer in Texas understands and speaks Spanish or any other language, in addition to English, this can help his or her clients (whose native language is not English) fight their criminal cases in several ways. Although any lawyer can request or obtain an interpreter for court proceedings for the client, if the client does not speak or understand English (because the client has a constitutional and statutory right to an interpreter), a lawyer who also speaks the client’s native language, such as Spanish, has advantages which can be used in the defense of the client, such as detecting inaccurate or incomplete translations (and do something about it), fully communicating with the client, reviewing evidence that is not in English (such as videos, audios, or statements), and/or formulating an effective defense strategy. Some of these advantages are discussed below.

If An Accused Does Not Understand or Speak English, He or She Has a Constitutional and Statutory Right to an Interpreter

In Linton v. State, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals (this is the highest state appellate court in Texas for criminal matters) explained that “[i]t is well settled that if a defendant cannot hear or does not speak English well enough to understand the trial proceedings or communicate with counsel, fundamental fairness and due process of law require that an interpreter be provided to translate between English and the accused’s own language.” 275 S.W.3d 493, 500 (Tex. Crim. App. 2009) (footnote omitted); see also e.g., Orellana v. State, 381 S.W.3d 645, 657 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2012, pet. ref’d) (“The right to an interpreter is part of an accused’s constitutional right to confrontation and a matter of due process.”) (citing Kan v. State, 4 S.W.3d 38, 41 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 1999, pet. ref’d), U.S. Const. amends. VI, XIV, and Tex. Const. Art. I, § 10). It is important to note that although the interpreter’s translation does not have to be “perfect,” it certainly must be true or accurate. See Linton, 275 S.W.3d at 501; see also Peralta v. State, 338 S.W.3d 598, 604 (Tex. App.—El Paso 2010, no pet.).

Further, under Texas law, “[w]hen a motion for appointment of an interpreter is filed by any party or on motion of the court, in any criminal proceeding, it is determined that a person charged or a witness does not understand and speak the English language, an interpreter must be sworn to interpret for the person charged or the witness.” Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Art. 38.30(a); see also Mendiola v. State, 924 S.W.2d 157, 161 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi 1995, pet. ref’d) (“A defendant is entitled to an interpreter when a motion is filed by any party or on motion of the court.”) (citing Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Art. 38.30(a)).[1] Moreover, a judge may become aware of a defendant’s language barrier by being informed by any of the lawyers involved in the case or by noticing such language barrier on his or her own. See Garcia v. State, 149 S.W.3d 135, 145 (Tex. Crim. App. 2004).

As such, it is important that Texas criminal defense lawyers bring to the court’s attention the fact that a client does not speak or understand English well enough to understand the proceedings (before, during, and even after such proceedings, such as a trial, if any) so that the court appoints an interpreter to assist their client with a true, accurate, and correct translation. This must be done to protect the client’s constitutional and statutory rights.

What Happens if An Interpreter’s Translation Is Incomplete or Inaccurate in a Texas Criminal Case?

Having a criminal defense lawyer in the Dallas – Fort Worth, Texas area who speaks and understands Spanish as part of the defense team has several advantages when it comes to understanding an interpreter’s translation. The lawyer can identify portions of the translation that are incomplete or inaccurate and do something about it, in a timely manner, to protect the client’s rights.

If there is an interpreter translating into English what a witness says while testifying in court (either for or against an accused), the bilingual criminal defense lawyer can carefully listen: (i) to what the witness says (in Spanish or in any other language); and (ii) to the interpreter’s translation. If the criminal defense attorney realizes that the interpreter’s translation is incomplete or inaccurate, then the attorney can do several things, such as: (a) impeaching the translation during cross-examination of the witness to cure it;[2] (b) impeaching the translation by placing the interpreter on the witness stand to cross-examine him or her as to what the witness said;[3] (c) introducing independent evidence to show that the interpreter’s version was incorrect;[4] and (d) timely complain about the translation’s inaccuracy before the trial court and timely mention the specific evidence or translation that is being challenged.[5]

In Garcia v. State, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals was presented with a novel issue: “what is required to preserve error when an inaccurate translation is offered into evidence?” 887 S.W.2d 862, 874 (Tex. Crim. App. 1994) (emphasis added), overruled on other grounds, Hammock v. State, 46 S.W.3d 889, 893 (Tex. Crim. App. 2001)). In Garcia, the State called a witness who testified with the help of a translator. Id. As such, the translator interpreted the questions from English to Spanish and the witness’s answers from Spanish to English. Id. The defendant/appellant specifically objected to the inaccuracy of the translation, and not to the general competence of the translator. Id.; see also e.g., Mendiola, 924 S.W.2d at 162 (“while an interpreter’s competency is a question of law, the accuracy of an individual translation is a question of fact.”).[6] However, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals overruled the defendant’s objection (or point of error) and reasoned as follows:

We, as an appellate court, can no more determine whether a translation is accurate or which of two translations is more accurate, than we can determine which of two witnesses is telling the truth, or which of the two is more truthful these are questions for the factfinder.

. . .

Similarly, just as [the defendant] may not preserve error by objecting at trial that a witness is lying, he may not preserve error objecting that a translation is inaccurate; there is simply no reviewable question to preserve. Just as he must impeach the lying witness at trial to cure the lie, a defendant must impeach the inaccurate or incomplete translation to cure it. As a question of fact, [the defendant] must settle the question of a translation’s accuracy at trial by impeaching the translation; cross-examination of the witness presents the most convenient vehicle, but impeachment may be accomplished by many other means.

Garcia, 887 S.W.2d at 875 (emphasis added) (footnotes and citation omitted). Moreover, the Garcia Court suggested that a defendant may impeach the translation by other means such as introducing independent evidence to show that the interpreter’s version was incorrect or by placing the interpreter in the witness stand to cross-examine him or her as to what the witness said. See id. at 875 n.8 (citing J.E. Macy, Annotation, Use of Interpreter in Court Proceedings, 172 A.L.R. 923, 951).

Based on the above, if a Texas criminal defense lawyer realizes that an interpreter’s translation is incorrect or incomplete at any pretrial proceeding and of course, during trial, then he or she should immediately address this at the trial court level because “questions regarding inaccuracies in a translation are issues of fact to be settled by the trier of fact.” See Galvan-Cerna v. State, 509 S.W.3d 398, 409 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2014, no pet.) (citations omitted). The trier of fact can be the jury or the judge, depending on the circumstances. Although the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals indicated in Garcia that a defendant may not preserve error by objecting that a translation is inaccurate, see Garcia, 887 S.W.2d at 875, a defendant’s Texas criminal defense lawyer should timely complain about such inaccuracy before the trial court and mention the specific evidence or translation that is being challenged (in addition to the remedies discussed above). This is probably a prudent thing to do in such situation.

For example, in Kan v. State, a case that was decided years after the Garcia case, the defendant argued on appeal that the translation was inaccurate (among other appellate grounds or points of error). 4 S.W.3d 38, 43 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 1999, pet. ref’d). However, in Kan, the Fourth Court of Appeals overruled this argument. See id. The Fourth Court of Appeals reasoned as follows:

We cannot review this issue “because there is no legal issue presented; it is a factual question which ultimately only the jury can answer and which is not reviewable by an appellate court.” Because this complaint was not lodged in the trial court, [the defendant] has waived any alleged error from inaccuracies in the translation. Notwithstanding [the] bar to appellate review, we note that [the defendant] has failed to point to any specific evidence in the record of inaccurate translation.

Kan, 4 S.W.3d at 43 (emphasis added) (footnote and citation omitted).[7] Simply put, the criminal defense lawyer must do something at the trial court level to complain about such inaccuracies, to cure them, to undermine them, to develop the record, and of course, to protect the client’s rights. However, to do this, the lawyer must be able to understand what the witness says and carefully compare it with what the interpreter says as a translation.

Speaking and Understanding Spanish Can Help a Criminal Defense Lawyer in Texas To Communicate With Spanish-speaking Clients, To Review Evidence in Spanish, and To Formulate an Effective Defense Strategy.

When a client does not speak English or if the client’s English is limited, it can be beneficial to have a criminal defense lawyer in Texas who speaks the client’s language, such as Spanish. Quite often, persons who are accused of an alleged offense have a clear and fresh recollection of the events that took place. However, due to a language barrier, sometimes it can be challenging for some of them to express to their lawyers what occurred, what they saw, and/or their side of the story in a clear, accurate, and thorough manner. Clear communication between a client and the criminal defense lawyer is very important, particularly when it comes to the investigation of the facts of the alleged event or alleged incident. Simply put, there must be clear and effective communication between criminal defense lawyers in Texas and clients who do not speak English or whose English is very limited. Additionally, a lawyer must explain the consequences (or potential consequences) or potential ramifications of an alleged offense or alleged crime to a client, or of a plea offer given by the prosecution. The client must be able to make an informed decision. Moreover, the client has the right to have his or her questions or concerns answered or explained by their lawyer.[8]

Speaking Spanish can also help Texas criminal defense attorneys when it comes to reviewing the discovery or evidence in a criminal case. For example, there can be witnesses or potential witnesses who provided to the police oral or written statements in Spanish as to what they saw or what they believe they saw. The same applies for 911 call audios or police body camera videos.[9] Understanding these statements in Spanish is crucial when it comes to the investigation of a case or if needed, for direct examination or cross-examination of witnesses. Moreover, one word or phrase can completely alter one’s understanding of the context of what occurred during an event or incident. All of the above should be taken into consideration when it comes to formulating an effective defense strategy while representing a client who is accused of an alleged crime in Texas.

Based on the foregoing, it is clear that if a criminal defense lawyer in Texas understands and speaks Spanish or any other language, in addition to English, this can help his or her clients (whose native language is not English) fight their criminal cases and formulate effective defensive strategies.

[1] See also e.g., Tex. Gov’t Code § 157.001(2) (‘“Licensed court interpreter’ means an individual licensed . . . by the commission to interpret court proceedings for an individual who can hear but who has no or limited English proficiency.”); Tex. Gov’t Code § 151.001(2) (defining the “Commission” as the Judicial Branch Certification Commission); Tex. Gov’t Code § 157.101(a) (a court interpreter license is issued to an applicant who has passed the appropriate examination prescribed by the commission and possesses the other qualifications required by Chapter 157 of the Texas Government Code); see also Smith v. State, No. 01-22-00227-CR, 2023 Tex. App. LEXIS 5387, at *3 n.1 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] July 25, 2023, no pet. h.) (mem. op., not designated for publication) (“A court interpreter’s license provides a designation as a ‘basic’ or ‘master’ interpreter.”) (citing Tex. Gov’t Code § 157.101(d)).

[2] See Garcia v. State, 887 S.W.2d 862, 875 (Tex. Crim. App. 1994) (“a defendant must impeach the inaccurate or incomplete translation to cure it.”), overruled on other grounds, Hammock v. State, 46 S.W.3d 889, 893 (Tex. Crim. App. 2001)).

[3] See id. at 875 n.8 (“the interpreter may be placed in the witness stand and cross-examined as to what the witness had said.”) (citation omitted).

[4] See id. (“Independent evidence may be introduced to show that the interpreter’s version was incorrect . . . .”) (citation omitted).

[5] See e.g., Kan v. State, 4 S.W.3d 38, 43 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 1999, pet. ref’d) (indicating that the defendant’s complaint –that the translation was inaccurate –was not lodged in the trial court and noting that the defendant failed to point out to any specific evidence in the record of inaccurate translation).

[6] This blog focuses on potential or possible inaccuracies (question of fact) of an interpreter’s translation in Texas criminal courts. However, there are many Texas cases that discuss the legal standard for the competency (question of law) of interpreters.

[7] See also e.g., Garcia, 887 S.W.2d at 875 n.9 (“in the present case, no specific objection was offered stating the problem with the interpretation admitted into evidence, nor was any ‘correct’ interpretation entered into the record by offer of proof or during cross examination of the witness [and] [t]herefore, even if we could review the question, we would have to find that appellant failed to preserve error.”).

[8] See e.g., Tex. R. Prof Conduct 1.03(b) (“A lawyer shall explain a matter to the extent reasonably necessary to permit the client to make informed decisions regarding the representation.”).

[9] Language barrier may also be a problem when the police is investigating an event or alleged incident or when they are talking to potential witnesses.

DISCLAIMER: The information in this in this blog is provided for informational or educational purposes only. This blog contains general information and may not reflect current legal developments. This blog (or the information in this blog): (a) is not intended to constitute legal advice; (b) does not constitute legal advice; (c) should not be construed as legal advice on any subject matter; (d) should not be a source of legal advice; and (e) does not create an attorney-client relationship between you and Legionnaire Law Firm, PLLC (or its attorney). By reading this blog, you understand and acknowledge that there is no attorney-client relationship between you and Legionnaire Law Firm, PLLC (or its attorney). Additionally, the transmission and receipt of the information contained in this blog and your access to this blog does not constitute an attorney-client relationship. Since this blog does not constitute legal advice, you should not rely upon any information contained herein for any purpose (each case, legal matter, legal proceeding, and situation is unique and different) and you should not use this blog as a substitute for competent legal advice from a licensed attorney in your state or jurisdiction. This blog and its contents are provided without warranty of any kind, either express or implied. Legionnaire Law Firm, PLLC and its attorney expressly disclaim all liability with respect to action taken or not taken based upon any information in this blog, or with respect to any errors or omissions in this blog. Reproduction, distribution, republication, and/or retransmission of this blog is prohibited unless the prior written consent of Legionnaire Law Firm, PLLC has been obtained.

Some Potential Consequences of Criminal Cases or Criminal Allegations in Texas

Mar 24, 2024

By: Guillermo Flores, Attorney, Legionnaire Law Firm, PLLC.

IMPORTANT: Please read the DISCLAIMER at the bottom of this blog prior to reading this blog.

This blog mentions some potential consequences of arrests, criminal charges, convictions, or even allegations of some crimes or offenses in Texas. However, there are numerous other potential consequences under both Texas law and federal law not mentioned here. Thus, it is important to understand and note that every case, legal matter, legal proceeding, or situation is different, unique, has different circumstances, and requires custom legal advice from a competent attorney.

In general, arrests, charges, convictions, or even mere allegations of crimes involving felonies or family violence (or domestic violence) in Texas can potentially affect a person’s life in several ways. These are serious offenses. Therefore, potential defendants, actual defendants, and their criminal defense attorneys should take these offenses (or alleged offenses) seriously. Simply put, there is a risk of direct and collateral consequences. In general, some of these consequences may affect a person’s life in numerous ways, including but not limited to: loss of freedom due to incarceration, immigration status (immigration law can be complex and thus, an accused or defendant who is not a U.S. citizen should consult with an immigration attorney),1 federal health care programs,2 ability to possess firearms (see below), family relations (see below), ability to qualify as an executor or administrator of a person’s estate,3 property,4 current or future employment (criminal background searches or reports),5 professional licenses,6 student loans or grants,7 lose the right to vote,8 serve on a petit jury or grand jury,9 Veteran’s benefits,10 parole eligibility, or enhancement of future criminal offenses.11

As previously indicated, this blog only mentions some potential consequences (in general); however, it is important to understand that there are many more other potential consequences, depending on the particular offense or circumstances. In addition to some of the potential consequences listed above, there are other potential consequences or circumstances that must be considered by persons who are accused or charged with a crime involving a felony or family violence (domestic violence). For example, possession of firearms and family relations are something to take into consideration (among other things).

Possession of Firearms

A person’s ability to possess firearms could be restricted as a result of some criminal convictions. This blog merely provides some general examples; however, there may be more provisions or laws restricting a person’s eligibility to possess firearms under Texas law or federal law. Generally speaking, under Texas law, a person who has been convicted of a felony may not possess a firearm after the conviction and before the fifth anniversary of the person’s release from confinement following conviction of the felony or the person’s release from supervision under community supervision, parole, or mandatory supervision, whichever date is later.12 Additionally, under Texas law, persons who have been convicted of a felony may not possess firearms (after the period stated above), at any location other than the premises at which such person lives.13 Moreover, under Texas law (another example), a person who was convicted of an assault punishable as a Class A misdemeanor against a family member or against a person from the same household (family violence or domestic violence), may not possess a firearm before the fifth anniversary of the later of: (1) the date of the person’s release from confinement following conviction of the misdemeanor; or (2) the date of the person’s release from community supervision following conviction of the misdemeanor.14 These are offenses that are located in the Texas Penal Code, which are known by Texas criminal defense lawyers.

In addition to Texas law, there can be restrictions under federal law. For example, federal law makes it unlawful for any person who has been convicted in any court of a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year, or for any person who has been convicted in any court of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence (among other provisions) “to ship or transport in interstate or foreign commerce, or possess in or affecting commerce, any firearm or ammunition; or to receive any firearm or ammunition which has been shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce.”15

Federal law (another example) also prohibits persons to ship or transport in interstate or foreign commerce any firearm or ammunition or receive any firearm or ammunition which has been shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce, if such persons are under an indictment for a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year.16 Moreover, federal law prohibits gun possession by individuals subject to domestic protective orders.17

Family Violence Offenses Can Potentially Affect Family Relations

Family violence or domestic violence allegations or convictions (or even deferred adjudication), can potentially affect a person’s family relations or family law proceedings. For example, by citing the Texas Family Code, the Dallas Court of Appeals stated in a memorandum opinion that a “trial court [is] required to consider family violence finding in proceeding[s] regarding parent-child relationship or spousal maintenance.”18 Simply put, Texas law requires courts to consider the commission of family violence in making child-custody determinations.19 Additionally, in regards to child custody in Texas, although there is a rebuttable presumption that the appointment of both parents of a child as joint managing conservators (joint custody) is in the child’s best interest, a finding of a history of family violence involving the parents of the child removes this presumption.20 Thus, accusations, allegations, or charges of family violence (or domestic violence) or findings of family violence can be very serious when it comes to family relations.

Additionally, in determining child-custody or child visitation (or possession), courts must consider evidence of intentional use of abusive physical force by a person directed against the person’s spouse, a parent of the child, or any person younger than 18 years of age and they also have to consider the commission of family violence (among other things).21 In regards to spousal maintenance (spouse support) proceedings (including spousal maintenance proceedings in suits for dissolution of marriage, i.e., divorce), courts also consider if a person from whom maintenance is requested was convicted of or received deferred adjudication for a criminal offense involving family violence, to determine eligibility for spousal maintenance (among other considerations).22 Moreover, a court that determines that a spouse is eligible to receive spousal maintenance from the other spouse is required to consider all relevant factors, including any history or pattern of family violence, to determine the nature, amount, duration, and manner of periodic payments.23

In conclusion, allegations, arrests, charges, and convictions of crimes or offenses involving felonies or family violence (domestic violence) in Texas are serious because they can potentially affect a person’s life or way of living in many ways. As such, a person accused of a felony, family violence, domestic violence, or any other crime or offense in Texas, should immediately consult with a Texas criminal defense attorney. Given what is at stake, these allegations and offenses must be taken seriously by persons who are accused of a felony or of a crime involving family violence (or domestic violence) and by their Texas criminal defense attorney.

1 See generally Padilla v. Kentucky, 559 U.S. 356, 356 (2010); see also e.g., Loch v. State, 621 S.W.3d 279, 284 n.1 (Tex. Crim. App. 2021) (“Under federal law, ‘any alien who is convicted of an aggravated felony at any time after admission is deportable’ . . . [f]urther, ‘any alien who at any time after admission is convicted of two or more crimes involving moral turpitude, not arising out of a single scheme of criminal misconduct, regardless of whether confined therefor and regardless of whether the convictions were in a single trial, is deportable.’”) (quoting 8 U.S.C. § 1227(a)(2)(A)(ii), (iii)); see also 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(43) (defining "aggravated felony"); see also e.g., 8 U.S.C. § 1227(a)(2)(A)(i) (crimes of moral turpitude), 8 U.S.C. § 1227(a)(2)(E)(i) (“Any alien who at any time after admission is convicted of a crime of domestic violence, a crime of stalking, or a crime of child abuse, child neglect, or child abandonment is deportable.”), 8 U.S.C. § 1227(a)(2)(B)(i) (controlled substances). Defendants (or potential defendants) who are not U.S. citizens should consult with a competent immigration attorney who understands immigration laws in connection with offenses or crimes.

2 See generally e.g., 42 U.S.C. § 1320a-7(a) (exclusion of some individuals and entities from participation in certain federal health care programs for felony convictions relating to some controlled substances or health care fraud).

3 See Tex. Est. Code § 304.003(a)(2); but see id. § 304.003(b).

4 E.g., Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Arts. 59.01(2), 59.02(a) (property that is contraband).

5 Many employers or future employers conduct background searches on employees or potential employees.

6 See Mitschke v. State, 129 S.W.3d 130, 135 (Tex. Crim. App. 2004) (“there are a number of direct consequences of a plea of guilty, such as . . . ineligibility for certain professional licenses”); see also e.g., Tex. Occ. Code § 53.021(b) (“A license holder’s license shall be revoked on the license holder’s imprisonment following a felony conviction, felony community supervision revocation, revocation of parole, or revocation of mandatory supervision.”).

7 See e.g., 20 U.S.C. § 1091(r).

8 See e.g., Mitschke, 129 S.W.3d at 135 (“there are a number of direct consequences of a plea of guilty, such as the loss for a period of years of the right to vote”); see also e.g., Tex. Elec. Code § 11.002(a)(4).

9 See Tex. Gov’t Code § 62.102(8)-(9) (disqualifications for jury service based on convictions of misdemeanor theft or felony, or under indictment or other legal accusation for such offenses); see also Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Art. 19A.101(a)(7)-(8) (disqualifications to be selected or serve as a grand juror based on convictions of misdemeanor theft or felony, or under indictment or other legal accusation for such offenses); Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Art. 35.16(a)(2)-(3) (listing challenges for cause to a juror based on conviction of misdemeanor theft or felony, or under indictment for such offenses).

10 See e.g., 38 U.S.C. §§ 5313, 5313B(a).

11 See e.g., Tex. Penal Code § 22.01(b)(2 )(A); see also e.g., Wilson v. State, Nos. 05-10-01207-CR, 05-10-01208-CR, 05-10-01209-CR, 05-10-01210-CR, 05-10-01211-CR, 05-10-01212-CR, 05-11-00087-CR, 2012 Tex. App. LEXIS 2192, at *10-11 (Tex. App.—Dallas Mar. 21, 2012, no pet.) (“any subsequent offense involving family violence will be enhanced to third degree felony”) (citing Tex. Penal Code § 22.01(b)(2)(A)).

12 See Tex. Penal Code § 46.04(a)(1).

13 See id. § 46.04(a)(2).

14 See id. § 46.04(b).

15 See 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1), (9).

16 See id. § 922(n).

17 See e.g., Webb v. Schlagal, 530 S.W.3d 793, 809 (Tex. App.—Eastland 2017, pet. denied) (“Congress had a substantial and compelling government interest to decrease domestic violence when it enacted Section 922(g)(8) of Title 18 of the United States Code, which disallows gun possession by individuals subject to domestic protective orders.”) (emphasis added) (citing United States v. Lippman, 369 F.3d 1039, 1044 (8th Cir. 2004)); Arnett v. State, No. 01-18-00859-CR, 2019 Tex. App. LEXIS 10764, at *13 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] Dec. 12, 2019, pet. ref'd) (federal law prohibits gun possession by individuals subject to domestic protective orders) (citation omitted).

18 Wilson v. State, LEXIS 2192, at *11 (mem. op., not designated for publication) (citing Tex. Fam. Code § 153.004(c)); see also Tex. Fam. Code § 153.004(c) ("The court shall consider the commission of family violence . . . in determining whether to deny, restrict, or limit the possession of a child by a parent who is appointed as a possessory conservator.").

19 See Ex parte Flores, 130 S.W.3d 100, 105 (Tex. App.—El Paso 2003, pet. ref’d) (citing Tex. Fam. Code § 153.004).

20 Tex. Fam. Code § 153.131(b).

21 See generally id. § 153.004.

22 See id. § 8.051(1) (Eligibility for Spousal Maintenance).

23 See id. § 8.052(11).