Jaime Casas Juarez, Jr., Appellant v. the State of Texas

Summary

The Court held that the confession and avoidance doctrine applies to the necessity defense, requiring a defendant to admit both the act and the culpable mental state to receive a jury instruction. Because Juarez’s testimony admitted the conduct and mental state, the trial judge erred in denying the instruction; the Court of Appeals judgment is affirmed and the case is remanded. Justice Holcomb, in a concurring opinion, agreed with the majority and explained why Juarez’s testimony raised the necessity defense.