I'll preface that I am not a lawyer. So anything I say is only personal opinion.All the bad guy got was 13 dollars and pocket knife but the question is would you be justified in what SEC 9.42 says about deadly force shooting him as he ran away from you? I hope I'm never put in this postion. Not sure it would be worth shooting someone over 13 dollars and a knife but other side of me says he need to be taken out so that he doesnt do this again. This was at night.
However, what some of us fail to realize is that the law is as explicit as it can be...but it it can be no more explicit than that.
In other words, though the law does a pretty good job of telling us what is illegal, it can't be expected to tell us everything that is llegal. There's some black, some white, and some gray.
There's a test a DA will apply to the call coming in from the PD, Constable, or Sheriff's Deputy responding: Did the shooter reasonably believe the use of deadly force was immediately necessary?
"Immediately necessary" is driven by circumstance. In the OP's description, immediacy is a fail.
The "Reasonable Man" evaluation is: Would an intelligent, thoughtful, reasonable person have acted in the same way? Would a reasonable person have believed deadly force was necessary?
Unfortunately, "reasonable belief" isn't determined by you. Your personal opinion doesn't matter.
You will need to be able to state why you did what you did to law enforcement officers, prosecuting attorneys, and a grand jury. If it comes to it, the "Reasonable Man" defense will be your jury plea.
I ain't saying to hesitate before you fire in a life-or-death situation. That's why we carry.
But shooting a robber in the back as he fled if he was no longer a threat? Absolutely not.
Please read the Texas Penal Code, in its entirety, at least twice each year. There are questions asked on the Forum every day that could be answered by reading the law:
http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/