TexasCHLforum.com

stroo wrote:Doesn't our castle doctrine already require "forcible entry" or something like that?

Texas Penal Code 9.32 says:

The actor's belief under Subsection (a)(2) that the
deadly force was immediately necessary as described by that
subdivision is presumed to be reasonable if the actor:
(1) knew or had reason to believe that the person
against whom the deadly force was used:
(A) unlawfully and with force entered, or was
attempting to enter unlawfully and with force, the actor's occupied
habitation, vehicle, or place of business or employment;

So, there are two issues. If your garage was standing wide open, then force would not be required to enter. Secondly, habitation is defined in 30.01

§ 30.01. DEFINITIONS. In this chapter:
(1) "Habitation" means a structure or vehicle that is
adapted for the overnight accommodation of persons, and includes:
(A) each separately secured or occupied portion
of the structure or vehicle; and
(B) each structure appurtenant to or connected
with the structure or vehicle.

So the garage would count as part of the habitation. Not 100% sure if 'appurtenant' in real estate law also includes detached garages, but no matter, force would still have to have been used to gain entry.

So, as Charles beat me to it, to get the presumption, then forcible entry must be included.

A wise man I know has a saying; 'Don't let your mouth ruin a good shoot'.

In this case, I am not sure the shoot was 100% above board, but as stated, his bragging and running at the mouth was what drove the final nail in the coffin for him.