Tex. Code Crim. Proc. art. 38.22

Current with legislation from the 2023 Regular and Special Sessions signed by the Governor as of November 21, 2023.

Section 38.22 - [Effective 1/1/2025] When Statements May Be Used

Sec. 1. In this article, a written statement of an accused means:

(1) a statement made by the accused in his own handwriting; or

(2) a statement made in a language the accused can read or understand that:

(A) is signed by the accused; or

(B) bears the mark of the accused, if the accused is unable to write and the mark is witnessed by a person other than a peace officer.

Sec. 2. No written statement made by an accused as a result of custodial interrogation is admissible as evidence against him in any criminal proceeding unless it is shown on the face of the statement that:

(a) the accused, prior to making the statement, either received from a magistrate the warning provided in Article 15.17 of this code or received from the person to whom the statement is made a warning that:

(1) he has the right to remain silent and not make any statement at all and that any statement he makes may be used against him at his trial;

(2) any statement he makes may be used as evidence against him in court;

(3) he has the right to have a lawyer present to advise him prior to and during any questioning;

(4) if he is unable to employ a lawyer, he has the right to have a lawyer appointed to advise him prior to and during any questioning; and

(5) he has the right to terminate the interview at any time; and

(b) the accused, prior to and during the making of the statement, knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily waived the rights set out in the warning prescribed by Subsection (a) of this section.

Sec. 3.

(a) No oral or sign language statement of an accused made as a result of custodial interrogation shall be admissible against the accused in a criminal proceeding unless:

(1) an electronic recording, which may include motion picture, video tape, or other visual recording, is made of the statement;

(2) prior to the statement but during the recording the accused is given the warning in Subsection (a) of Section 2 above and the accused knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily waives any rights set out in the warning;

(3) the recording device was capable of making an accurate recording, the operator was competent, and the recording is accurate and has not been altered;

(4) all voices on the recording are identified; and

(5) not later than the 20th day before the date of the proceeding, the attorney representing the defendant is provided with a true, complete, and accurate copy of all recordings of the defendant made under this article.

(b) Every electronic recording of any statement made by an accused during a custodial interrogation must be preserved until such time as the defendant's conviction for any offense relating thereto is final, all direct appeals therefrom are exhausted, or the prosecution of such offenses is barred by law.

(c) Subsection (a) of this section shall not apply to any statement which contains assertions of facts or circumstances that are found to be true and which conduce to establish the guilt of the accused, such as the finding of secreted or stolen property or the instrument with which he states the offense was committed.

(d) If the accused is a deaf person, the accused's statement under Section 2 or Section 3(a) of this article is not admissible against the accused unless the warning in Section 2 of this article is interpreted to the deaf person by an interpreter who is qualified and sworn as provided in Article 38.31 of this code.

(e) The courts of this state shall strictly construe Subsection (a) of this section and may not interpret Subsection (a) as making admissible a statement unless all requirements of the subsection have been satisfied by the state, except that:

(1) only voices that are material are identified; and

(2) the accused was given the warning in Subsection (a) of Section 2 above or its fully effective equivalent.

Sec. 4. When any statement, the admissibility of which is covered by this article, is sought to be used in connection with an official proceeding, any person who swears falsely to facts and circumstances which, if true, would render the statement admissible under this article is presumed to have acted with intent to deceive and with knowledge of the statement's meaning for the purpose of prosecution for aggravated perjury under Section 37.03 of the Penal Code. No person prosecuted under this subsection shall be eligible for probation.

Sec. 5. Nothing in this article precludes the admission of a statement made by the accused in open court at his trial, before a grand jury, or at an examining trial in compliance with Articles 16.03 and 16.04 of this code, or of a statement that is the res gestae of the arrest or of the offense, or of a statement that does not stem from custodial interrogation, or of a voluntary statement, whether or not the result of custodial interrogation, that has a bearing upon the credibility of the accused as a witness, or of any other statement that may be admissible under law.

Sec. 6. In all cases where a question is raised as to the voluntariness of a statement of an accused, the court must make an independent finding in the absence of the jury as to whether the statement was made under voluntary conditions. If the statement has been found to have been voluntarily made and held admissible as a matter of law and fact by the court in a hearing in the absence of the jury, the court must enter an order stating its conclusion as to whether or not the statement was voluntarily made, along with the specific finding of facts upon which the conclusion was based, which order shall be filed among the papers of the cause. Such order shall not be exhibited to the jury nor the finding thereof made known to the jury in any manner. Upon the finding by the judge as a matter of law and fact that the statement was voluntarily made, evidence pertaining to such matter may be submitted to the jury and it shall be instructed that unless the jury believes beyond a reasonable doubt that the statement was voluntarily made, the jury shall not consider such statement for any purpose nor any evidence obtained as a result thereof. In any case where a motion to suppress the statement has been filed and evidence has been submitted to the court on this issue, the court within its discretion may reconsider such evidence in his finding that the statement was voluntarily made and the same evidence submitted to the court at the hearing on the motion to suppress shall be made a part of the record the same as if it were being presented at the time of trial. However, the state or the defendant shall be entitled to present any new evidence on the issue of the voluntariness of the statement prior to the court's final ruling and order stating its findings.

Sec. 7. When the issue is raised by the evidence, the trial judge shall appropriately instruct the jury, generally, on the law pertaining to such statement.

Sec. 8. Notwithstanding any other provision of this article, a written, oral, or sign language statement of an accused made as a result of a custodial interrogation is admissible against the accused in a criminal proceeding in this state if:

(1) the statement was obtained in another state and was obtained in compliance with the laws of that state or this state; or

(2) the statement was obtained by a federal law enforcement officer in this state or another state and was obtained in compliance with the laws of the United States.

Sec.9. Notwithstanding any other provision of this article, no oral, sign language, or written statement that is made by a person accused of an offense listed in Article 2B.0202(a) and made as a result of a custodial interrogation occurring in a place of detention, as defined by Article 2B.0201 , is admissible against the accused in a criminal proceeding unless:

(1) an electronic recording was made of the statement, as required by Article 2B.0202(a) ; or

(2) the attorney representing the state offers proof satisfactory to the court that good cause, as described by Article 2B.0202(c) , existed that made electronic recording of the custodial interrogation infeasible.

Tex. Code Crim. Proc. § 38.22

Amended by Acts 2023, Texas Acts of the 88th Leg.- Regular Session, ch. 765,Sec. 2.020, eff. 1/1/2025.

Amended by Acts 2017, Texas Acts of the 85th Leg. - Regular Session, ch. 1122,Sec. 2, eff. 9/1/2017.

Amended by Acts 2017, Texas Acts of the 85th Leg. - Regular Session, ch. 686,Sec. 6, eff. 9/1/2017.

Amended by Acts 2013, 83rd Leg. - Regular Session, ch. 679,Sec. 1, eff. 9/1/2013.

Amended by Acts 1977, 65th Leg., p. 935, ch. 348, Sec. 2, eff. 8/29/1977. Sec. 3(a) amended by Acts 1979, 66th Leg., p. 398, ch. 186, Sec. 4, eff. 5/15/1979; Sec. 3(d) added by Acts 1979, 66th Leg., p. 398, ch. 186, Sec. 5, eff. 5/15/1979; Sec. 3 amended by Acts 1981, 67th Leg., p. 711, ch. 271, Sec. 1, eff. 9/1/1981; Sec. 3(a) amended by Acts 1989, 71st Leg., ch. 777, Sec. 1, eff. 9/1/1989; Sec. 3(e) added by Acts 1989, 71st Leg., ch. 777, Sec. 2, eff. 9/1/1989; Sec. 8 added by Acts 2001, 77th Leg., ch. 990, Sec. 1, eff. 9/1/2001.

Amended by Acts 1967, 60th Leg., p. 1740, ch. 659, Sec. 23, eff. 8/28/1967

Acts 1965, 59th Leg., vol. 2, p. 317, ch. 722.

See Acts 2017, Texas Acts of the 85th Leg. - Regular Session, ch. 1122, Sec. 3.

See Acts 2017, Texas Acts of the 85th Leg. - Regular Session, ch. 686, Sec. 11.

This section is set out more than once due to postponed, multiple, or conflicting amendments.