What type of damage must be present to invoke a "necessity" defense in Texas?

The necessity defense in Texas law allows a person to justify an otherwise criminal act if they were faced with an immediate and unavoidable situation that posed a greater harm than the harm caused by their actions. The essence of this defense is rooted in the idea that the individual had no feasible legal alternative and acted to prevent a more significant harm from occurring.

In this context, the concept of "imminent harm that is greater than the harm caused” is critical. It emphasizes that the person must demonstrate that the harm they were trying to avoid was not only immediate but also substantially more severe than the consequences of their actions. This aligns with the legal threshold required to effectively invoke this defense, ensuring that individuals cannot take undue advantage of the necessity defense by arguing it for relatively minor offenses.

This framework serves to balance the need for legal accountability with the recognition of unavoidable circumstances where the preservation of life or prevention of significant injury takes precedence over following the law.

Considering the other options: harm that is less than or comparable to the harm caused would not satisfy the legal standards of the necessity defense, as this could undermine the rationale of acting to prevent a greater evil. Additionally, arguing that any form of harm, no matter how minor, is sufficient would not align with the principles