Firm Accolades
D Magazine
Understanding Intoxication Assault in Texas
In Texas, intoxication assault is classified as a third-degree felony, which carries severe consequences. A conviction can result in a prison sentence ranging from two to ten years, along with fines up to $10,000. Additionally, the convicted individual may face a suspension of their driver’s license and mandatory participation in alcohol education or treatment programs. The gravity of these penalties makes it crucial for anyone facing such charges to understand the nuances of the law and the defenses available. Intoxication is broadly defined under Texas law as having a blood alcohol concentration (BAC) of 0.08 percent or higher, or not having the normal use of mental or physical faculties due to the consumption of alcohol, drugs, or a combination of both. Serious bodily injury, on the other hand, refers to an injury that creates a substantial risk of death or causes permanent disfigurement or protracted loss or impairment of the function of any bodily member or organ. For the prosecution to secure a conviction for intoxication assault, they must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused was intoxicated at the time of the accident, that this intoxication was the proximate cause of the accident, and that the accident resulted in serious bodily injury to another person. Given the complexity of these elements, several defenses can be raised depending on the specifics of the case.
Managing Partner
Partner & Criminal Division Chief
Criminal Trial Division
Criminal Trial Division
Of Counsel
Challenging the Evidence of Intoxication
One of the most common defenses in intoxication assault cases involves challenging the evidence of intoxication. The prosecution typically relies on breathalyzer or blood test results to establish that the defendant was intoxicated. However, these tests are not infallible and can be subject to various errors. For instance, breathalyzer machines must be properly calibrated and maintained, and the individual administering the test must be adequately trained. If there are any irregularities in the testing process or if the machine was not functioning correctly, the results may be challenged in court. Moreover, the timing of the test is critical. The body continues to absorb alcohol after drinking, and a person’s BAC can rise even after they have stopped drinking. This means that a BAC test administered some time after the alleged offense might not accurately reflect the defendant’s BAC at the time of the accident. By scrutinizing the timing and administration of the test, it is possible to cast doubt on the accuracy of the results, thereby weakening the prosecution’s case. Another aspect of challenging the evidence of intoxication involves questioning the observations of law enforcement officers. Officers often rely on field sobriety tests to assess whether a driver is intoxicated. However, these tests are highly subjective and can be influenced by a variety of factors unrelated to intoxication, such as fatigue, anxiety, medical conditions, or even the conditions under which the tests are administered. If the defense can demonstrate that the officer’s observations were unreliable or that the tests were conducted improperly, this can undermine the prosecution’s claim that the defendant was intoxicated.Causation: Was Intoxication the Proximate Cause?
Even if it is established that the defendant was intoxicated, the prosecution must also prove that this intoxication was the proximate cause of the accident that resulted in serious bodily injury. This is a crucial element of the offense, and it provides another avenue for the defense. The defense can argue that the accident was caused by factors other than the defendant’s intoxication. For example, the injured party may have been driving recklessly or may have engaged in sudden, unexpected maneuvers that made the collision unavoidable. Alternatively, road conditions, weather, or mechanical failures could have contributed to the accident. If it can be shown that the accident would have occurred regardless of the defendant’s intoxication, this can serve as a defense to the charge of intoxication assault.
"Deandra Grant Law – Criminal & DWI Defense handled my case with diligence and professionalism. Deandra Grant's reputation is stellar and now I know why. She has a team of individuals who provide quality service."
- N. Coulter
"Deandra Grant Law – Criminal & DWI Defense fights hard for their clients and is always willing to go above and beyond. They are the best firm for DWI cases in DFW and beyond. Definitely hire them to represent you in any pending cases."
- P. Williams
"Deandra Grant made a tough situation so much better. She listened to my concerns and helped me so much with my case. I would recommend her to anyone needing legal services."
- M. Haley
Questioning the Severity of the Injury
Another possible defense in an intoxication assault case is to challenge whether the injury sustained by the other party qualifies as “serious bodily injury” under Texas law. The definition of serious bodily injury is specific, and not all injuries meet the criteria. For example, an injury that is painful but does not result in a substantial risk of death, disfigurement, or prolonged impairment may not qualify as serious bodily injury. In some cases, the defense may be able to obtain medical records or testimony to argue that the injury sustained by the victim does not meet the legal threshold for serious bodily injury. If successful, this defense could result in a reduction of the charges or even a dismissal of the case.Related Videos
Judge or Jury Trial?
Choosing a Criminal Defense Attorney