PART I - GENERAL PROVISIONS
ARTICLE 3. GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF JUSTIFICATION

§3.02. Justification Generally: Choice of Evils.
(1) Conduct that the actor believes to be necessary to avoid harm or evil to himself or herself for to another is justifiable, provided that:
(a) the harm or evil sought to be avoided by such conduct is greater than that sought to be prevented by the law defining the offense charged; and
(b) neither this code nor other law defining the offense provides exceptions or defenses dealing with the specific situation involved; and
(c) a legislative purpose to exclude the justification claimed does not otherwise plainly appear.
(2) When the actor was reckless or negligent in bringing about the situation requiring a choice of harms or evils or in appraising the necessity for his or her conduct, the justification afforded by this Section is unavailable in a prosecution for any offense for which recklessness or negligence, as the case may be, suffices to establish culpability.

PART I - GENERAL PROVISIONS
ARTICLE 3. GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF JUSTIFICATION

3.05. Use of Force for the Protection of Other Persons.
(1) Subject to the provisions of this Section and of Section 3.09, the use of force upon or toward the person of another is justifiable to protect a third person when:
(a) the actor would be justified under Section 3.04 in using such force to protect himself or herself against the injury the actor believes to be threatened to the person whom the actor seeks to protect; and
(b) under the circumstances as the actor believes them to be, the person whom the actor seeks to protect would be justified in using such protective force; and
(c) the actor believes that his or her intervention is necessary for the protection of such other person.
(2) Notwithstanding Subsection (1) of this Section:
(a) when the actor would be obliged under Section 3.04 to retreat, to surrender the possession of a thing, or to comply with a demand before using force in self-protection, the actor is not obliged to do so before using force for the protection of another person, unless the actor knows that he or she can thereby secure the reasonable safety of such other person; and
(b) when the person whom the actor seeks to protect would be obliged under Section 3.04 to retreat, to surrender the possession of a thing, or to comply with a demand if the person knew that he or she could obtain reasonable safety by so doing, the actor is obliged to try to cause the person to do so before using force in the person's protection if the actor knows that he or she can obtain reasonable safety in that way; and
(c) neither the actor nor the person whom the actor seeks to protect is obliged to retreat when in the other's dwelling or place of work to any greater extent than his or her own.

§3.06. Use of Force for Protection of Property.
(1) Use of force justifiable for protection of property. Subject to the provisions of this Section and of Section 3.09, the use of force upon or toward the person of another is justifiable when the actor believes that such force is immediately necessary:
(a) to prevent or terminate an unlawful entry or other trespass upon land or a trespass against or the unlawful carrying away of tangible, movable property, provided that such land or movable property is, or is believed by the actor to be, in the actor's possession or in the possession of another person whose protection the actor acts; or
(b) to effect an entry or re-entry upon land or to retake tangible movable property, provided that the actor believes that he or she, or the person by whose authority the actor acts, or a person from whom the actor or such other person derives title, was unlawfully dispossessed of such land or movable property and is entitled to possession, and provided, further, that:
(i) the force is used immediately or on fresh pursuit after such dispossession; or
(ii) the actor believes that the person against whom he or she uses force has no claim of right to the possession of the property and, in the case of land, the circumstances, as the actor believes them to be, are of such urgency that it would be an exceptional hardship to postpone the entry or re-entry until a court order is obtained.
(2) Meaning of possession. For the purposes of Subsection (1) of this Section:
(a) a person who has parted with the custody of property to another who refuses to restore it to him or her is no longer in possession, unless the property is movable and was and still is located on land in his or her possession;
(b) a person who has been dispossessed of land does not regain possession thereof merely by setting foot on the land;
(c) a person who has a license to use or occupy real property is deemed to be in possession of the property except against the licensor acting under claim of right.
(3) Limitations on justifiable use of force.
(a) Request to desist. The use of force is justifiable under this Section only if the actor first requests the person against whom such force is used to desist from such person's interference with the property, unless the actor believes that:
(i) the request would be useless; or
(ii) it would be dangerous to the actor or another person to make the request; or
(iii) substantial harm will be done to the property that is sought to be protected before the request can effectively be made.
(b) Exclusion of trespasser. The use of force to prevent or terminate a trespass is not justifiable under this Section if the actor knows that the exclusion of the trespasser will expose the trespasser to substantial danger of serious bodily injury.
(c) Resistance of lawful re-entry or recaption. The use of force to prevent an entry or re-entry upon land or the recaption of movable property is not justifiable under this Section, although the actor believes that such re-entry or recaption is unlawful, if:
(i) the re-entry or recaption is made by or on behalf of a person who was actually dispossessed of the property; and
(ii) it is otherwise justifiable under Subsection (1)(b) of this Section.
(d) Use of deadly force. The use of deadly force is not justifiable under this Section unless the actor believes that the person against whom the force is used is attempting to commit or consummate arson, burglary, robbery or other felonious theft or property destruction and the use of force other than deadly force to prevent the commission or the consummation of the crime would expose the actor or another in the actor's presence to substantial danger of serious bodily injury.
(4) Use of device to protect property. The justification afforded by this Section extends to the use of a device for the purpose of protecting property only if:
(a)the device is not designed to cause or known to create a substantial risk of causing death or serious bodily injury; and
(b) the use of the particular device to protect the property from entry or trespass is reasonable under the circumstances, as the actor believes them to be; and
(c) the device is one customarily used for such a purpose or reasonable care is taken to make known to probable intruders the fact that it is used.