Mark Andrew Telthorster, Petitioner v. Ollie Lee Tennell, Respondent

Summary

The Texas Supreme Court held that an officer who injures a suspect during an arrest is entitled to official immunity if he can show that a reasonably prudent officer could have believed his conduct was justified based on the information then available. The Court rejected the need‑risk analysis from Wadewitz as unnecessary in arrest cases and affirmed that the Chambers "could have believed" test governs the good‑faith inquiry. Accordingly, the Court reversed the Court of Appeals and entered judgment for the officer. Justice ENOCH and Justice OWEN filed concurring opinions, with Justice ENOCH disagreeing with the majority's reasoning on the good‑faith test.