A person accused of family violence may discover that the State is not prosecuting only one alleged incident.
Instead, prosecutors may allege that multiple assaults occurring over a period of time constitute the Texas offense of Continuous Violence Against the Family.
That changes the structure of the case.
The defense may need to investigate not one confrontation, but several alleged events—sometimes occurring on different dates, at different locations, with different witnesses and different amounts of supporting evidence.
At Taylor Defense Firm, we separate those allegations before putting them back together:
- What specific incidents does the State rely upon?
- When did each allegedly occur?
- Who was involved?
- What conduct allegedly occurred during each incident?
- What evidence independently supports each allegation?
- And can the State prove the statutory requirements for continuous family violence?
What Is Continuous Violence Against the Family?
Texas law creates a specific felony offense addressing repeated assaultive conduct involving family violence.
Generally, the State must prove that during a period of 12 months or less, the accused two or more times engaged in conduct constituting an assault involving bodily injury against another person or persons whose relationship to or association with the accused falls within the applicable family-violence provisions.
That means the prosecution is not based simply upon the allegation:
"This relationship was violent."
The State must prove qualifying criminal conduct.
The State Needs More Than One Qualifying Incident
The word "continuous" can be misleading.
The prosecution does not necessarily allege one uninterrupted physical confrontation.
Instead, the statute addresses multiple qualifying assaultive acts occurring within the required period.
The defense therefore needs to identify the incidents the prosecution intends to rely upon.
We may build a separate file for each alleged event:
- Incident A
- Incident B
- Incident C
- and any additional incidents alleged by the State.
Each can then be examined independently.
The 12-Month Period Matters
Timing is part of the offense.
The State's theory should identify qualifying conduct occurring during a period of 12 months or less.
That makes dates important.
We may construct a chronology using:
- police reports;
- 911 records;
- photographs;
- text messages;
- medical records;
- witness statements;
- body-camera footage;
- social-media records where relevant and lawfully obtained;
- calendars;
- location evidence; and
- other reliable records.
When witnesses give approximate dates, the surrounding evidence may become especially important.
Each Alleged Incident Deserves Its Own Investigation
A major danger in a multi-incident case is allowing the allegations to merge into one generalized accusation.
Suppose the State alleges three incidents.
One may have photographs.
Another may have a 911 call.
A third may have no police report and depend entirely upon a later statement.
Those are not necessarily equivalent evidentiary events.
We ask separately:
- What allegedly happened?
- When?
- Where?
- Who witnessed it?
- Was it reported at the time?
- Were injuries documented?
- What did the alleged victim say then?
- What does the alleged victim say now?
- What objective evidence exists?
Only after examining each allegation separately should the complete prosecution be evaluated.
Not Every Argument Is an Assault
A troubled relationship may involve arguments, shouting, insults, jealousy, separation, reconciliation, financial disputes, or other conflict.
Those circumstances can provide context.
They do not automatically establish the criminal conduct required for Continuous Violence Against the Family.
The State must prove qualifying assaultive conduct—not merely that the relationship was unhappy or volatile.
That distinction can become particularly important when a witness describes months or years of relationship problems alongside a smaller number of specific physical allegations.
Bodily Injury Still Matters
The qualifying assaultive conduct under this offense involves bodily-injury assault.
The defense therefore examines the injury evidence associated with each alleged event.
Depending upon the case, that may include:
- complaints of pain;
- photographs;
- bruising;
- scratches;
- medical treatment;
- EMS records;
- witness observations; and
- statements concerning injury.
The evidence may be strong for one alleged incident and weak for another.
That difference matters in a prosecution requiring multiple qualifying acts.
The Relationship Must Qualify Under Texas Law
The prosecution also depends upon the legal relationship or association between the accused and the alleged victim or victims.
Texas family-violence law can encompass certain family members, household members, and dating relationships.
The actual relationship should be identified rather than assumed.
This is especially important when the allegations involve different people.
The Incidents Do Not Necessarily Have to Involve the Same Alleged Victim
Texas law can permit a Continuous Violence Against the Family prosecution involving qualifying conduct against another person or persons whose relationship or association with the defendant falls within the applicable family-violence provisions.
That makes it important to identify:
- Who is associated with each alleged incident?
- What is that person's legal relationship to the accused?
- What qualifying conduct does the State attribute to that incident?
A multi-victim allegation should be broken down just as carefully as a multi-incident allegation involving one complainant.
Police Reports May Exist for Only Some of the Allegations
Continuous-family-violence cases can develop after police investigate a recent incident and then learn about allegations concerning earlier events.
The earlier events may never have been reported to police.
That does not automatically make them false.
It also does not make them automatically true.
It means the available evidence may be different.
An earlier allegation might be supported by:
- contemporaneous text messages;
- photographs;
- medical treatment;
- statements to friends or family;
- digital communications;
- witnesses; or
- other evidence.
Or it may depend primarily upon a later recollection.
The evidentiary strength of each incident should be evaluated individually.
Text Messages Can Become Important Evidence
Messages between the parties may provide valuable context.
They may contain:
- contemporaneous descriptions of an incident;
- apologies;
- accusations;
- denials;
- explanations for injuries;
- discussions of separation;
- threats;
- reconciliation;
- references to witnesses; or
- statements inconsistent with later testimony.
Context matters.
A single selected message may look very different when the conversation immediately before and after it is included.
Whenever possible, we want the complete relevant exchange rather than isolated screenshots.
Photographs Should Be Matched to the Correct Incident
In a case involving several alleged assaults, photographs can become confusing.
We want to know:
- Which incident does this photograph supposedly document?
- When was it taken?
- Who took it?
- Was it transmitted to anyone at the time?
- Is metadata available?
- Does a police report reference it?
- Does the alleged victim identify the injury consistently?
A photograph of an injury may be important evidence, but it should be connected reliably to the incident the State claims it proves.
Later Allegations Should Be Compared With Earlier Statements
When multiple incidents are described during a later investigation, we compare those descriptions with any contemporaneous evidence.
Did the alleged victim mention the earlier event in messages at the time?
Tell a friend?
Seek medical treatment?
Photograph an injury?
Describe it differently later?
Again, absence of contemporaneous reporting does not automatically establish that an incident never occurred.
But the complete history can be relevant when credibility becomes contested.
Self-Defense May Apply Differently to Different Incidents
A multi-incident prosecution does not necessarily have one defense theory for every allegation.
One alleged incident might be denied completely.
Another may involve an accidental injury.
Another may raise self-defense.
Another may involve disagreement about who initiated the physical confrontation.
The defense should not force several factually different events into one explanation merely because the State charged them together.
Each incident should be defended according to its own evidence.
The Jury's Role Has a Special Feature in These Cases
Continuous Violence Against the Family contains an important statutory feature concerning jury agreement.
Jurors are not required to agree unanimously about the specific conduct constituting the individual underlying assaultive acts or the exact date those acts occurred.
But the jury must unanimously agree that the defendant, during the required period, two or more times engaged in conduct constituting the qualifying assault offense.
That makes the structure of the State's proof especially important.
A defense must understand not only each alleged incident but how the prosecution intends to combine those allegations to prove the continuous-violence offense.
The State Cannot Simply Substitute Relationship History for Proof
In a long relationship, a jury may hear substantial evidence about arguments and interpersonal problems.
That background can create a powerful overall impression.
But the criminal charge still requires proof of the statutory offense.
One important defense task is keeping the legal question clear:
Which specific evidence establishes the required qualifying assaultive acts?
Relationship history may provide context. It should not substitute for proof.
Build a Separate Timeline for Every Alleged Incident
At Taylor Defense Firm, we may begin with a master chronology:
relationship begins → alleged Incident A → communications → alleged Incident B → reconciliation/separation → alleged Incident C → police investigation → later disclosures → charging decision.
Then we build an individual evidence analysis for each alleged incident:
date → location → accusation → injury → witnesses → 911 → police report → body camera → photographs → medical evidence → communications → later statements → defense evidence.
We then ask:
- Which incidents does the State rely upon?
- Do at least two involve qualifying assaultive conduct?
- Did they occur during the required statutory period?
- Does the relationship qualify?
- What evidence independently supports each incident?
- Are photographs and records tied to the correct event?
- Did the accounts change over time?
- Does self-defense or another defense apply to any individual incident?
- And can the State prove the continuous-violence offense beyond a reasonable doubt?
A Continuous Violence Against the Family prosecution can create a powerful narrative because several accusations are presented together.
That is precisely why the allegations should first be separated and examined individually.
Multiple accusations do not become stronger merely because they are grouped together. The State still must prove the qualifying criminal conduct required by Texas law.
What Is the Punishment for Continuous Violence Against the Family?
Continuous Violence Against the Family is generally a third-degree felony in Texas.
The punishment range for a third-degree felony is:
- 2 to 10 years in prison; and
- a possible fine of up to $10,000.
The offense is different from an ordinary single-incident assault because the State generally alleges that, during a period of 12 months or less, the accused two or more times engaged in qualifying assaultive conduct against a person or persons whose relationship to or association with the accused falls within the applicable Texas family-violence provisions.
The punishment analysis does not necessarily end with the basic third-degree felony range.
A defendant's prior felony convictions may enhance the applicable punishment range under Texas's habitual and repeat-offender statutes when the statutory requirements are satisfied.
Prior convictions must be examined carefully.
Whether an enhancement applies can depend upon:
- the nature of the prior conviction;
- whether it is legally available for enhancement; and
- in some enhancement situations, the sequence of the prior offenses and convictions.
A defendant facing this charge should therefore know both the punishment range for the charged offense and whether the State has alleged—or could legally allege—enhancement paragraphs that change that range.