top of page
  • Writer's pictureBrian Foley

Houston Criminal Defense Attorney - Texas Code of Criminal Procedure Art.

Houston Criminal Defense Attorney - Texas Code of Criminal procedure Article 2.136 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure provides immunity to peace officers from liability for damages arising from an act relating to the collection or reporting of information as required by Article 2.133 or under a policy adopted under Article 2.132. This provision was added to the Code in 2001 by the Texas Legislature.


The purpose of this provision is to shield peace officers from lawsuits that arise from actions taken in good faith in the course of their official duties. For example, if a peace officer collects or reports information in accordance with departmental policy, but the information turns out to be incorrect, the officer is protected from liability for damages arising from the mistake.


However, the immunity provided by Article 2.136 is not absolute. It only applies if the peace officer was acting in good faith and within the scope of their official duties. If a peace officer acts outside of their authority, such as using excessive force or violating someone's constitutional rights, they may still be liable for damages under federal law.

One way that individuals may seek redress for police misconduct is by filing a lawsuit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This federal law allows individuals to sue state and local government officials, including police officers, for violating their constitutional rights. If successful, the plaintiff can recover damages for the harm they suffered as a result of the officer's misconduct.


To prevail in a § 1983 action against a police officer, the plaintiff must prove that the officer acted under color of law, meaning that they were acting in their official capacity as a government employee at the time of the alleged misconduct. The plaintiff must also prove that the officer violated a constitutional right, such as the Fourth Amendment's protection against unreasonable searches and seizures or the Eighth Amendment's prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment.


In addition, the plaintiff must show that the officer's conduct caused them to suffer damages, such as physical injury, emotional distress, or financial loss. If the plaintiff can meet all of these elements, they may be able to recover damages from the officer, even if the officer was acting in good faith and within the scope of their official duties.


In summary, Article 2.136 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure provides immunity to peace officers from liability for damages arising from the collection or reporting of information in good faith and within the scope of their official duties. However, this immunity is not absolute, and police officers may still be held liable for violating someone's constitutional rights under federal law. Individuals who believe that their constitutional rights have been violated by police misconduct may be able to seek redress through a § 1983 action in federal court.


Art. 2.136. LIABILITY. A peace officer is not liable for damages arising from an act relating to the collection or reporting of information as required by Article 2.133 or under a policy adopted under Article 2.132. Added by Acts 2001, 77th Leg., ch. 947, Sec. 1, eff. Sept. 1, 2001.



For litigants who do not have counsel: Reading this blog post does not create an attorney client relationship. Call to set up a free consultation.


For the general public: This Blog/Web Site is for educational purposes only and it provides general information and a general understanding of the law, but does not provide specific legal advice. By using this site, commenting on posts, or sending inquiries through the site or contact email, you confirm that there is no attorney-client relationship created. Don't just read this as a substitute for competent legal advice from a licensed attorney.


For attorneys: This Blog is informational and educational in nature and is not a substitute for Westlaw or other research and consultation on specific matters pertaining to your clients. As you know the law can change day to day based on recent case opinions. And unfortunately you shouldn't cite it in court as binding authority because it is not. Mention it to your friends, just seek real consultation if it’s something important.




28 views0 comments

Commentaires


bottom of page