Mutual Combat: When Both Parties Are at Fault

A How-To Guide to Understanding Mutual Combat in Texas Assault Cases

In Texas, not all fights lead to clear-cut criminal liability. Sometimes, both people involved agree to engage in a physical altercation — willingly, without coercion, and without one party clearly initiating the conflict. This is what’s referred to as mutual combat.

But can you still be charged with assault if both parties willingly participated? The answer is yes — and yet, mutual combat can be used as part of a strategic defense, especially when the State tries to overcharge one party or ignore the role of the alleged victim.

In this post, we’ll walk you through how mutual combat is treated under Texas law, when it applies, how it differs from self-defense, and how a skilled criminal defense attorney near you can use it to your advantage.

What Is Mutual Combat Under Texas Law?

Texas does not have a formal statutory defense labeled "mutual combat," but the concept is recognized through case law and jury instructions. In general terms, mutual combat occurs when both parties willingly engage in a fight, understanding the risk of injury, without one party clearly acting in self-defense.

Under Texas Penal Code § 22.06 (Consent as Defense), a person may assert that the conduct did not constitute an offense if:

• The victim consented to the actor’s conduct, or
• The conduct did not threaten or inflict serious bodily injury, and
• The conduct was a reasonably foreseeable hazard of a joint participation in an athletic contest or comparable competitive activity (including consensual fights)

In other words, consent to fight — or at least mutual willingness to engage — can sometimes mitigate or defeat assault charges.

When Is Mutual Combat a Viable Defense?

Mutual combat may be a viable defense when:

• Both parties engaged in a physical fight without one person clearly acting in self-defense
• There is no significant disparity in injuries
• Witnesses confirm that both individuals agreed to the altercation
• The alleged victim provoked or participated equally in the fight

Your attorney near you may raise mutual combat to argue:

• That both parties shared blame
• That prosecution is overreaching in charging only one person
• That a jury instruction on mutual combat is appropriate at trial
• That plea negotiations should reflect shared responsibility, not sole blame

Mutual Combat vs. Self-Defense: What’s the Difference?

Self-defense is based on the idea that you acted to protect yourself from an unlawful attack. Mutual combat, by contrast, assumes both parties voluntarily engaged, not that one party was defending themselves.

Key differences include:

• Self-defense requires a reasonable fear of harm
• Mutual combat assumes shared intent to fight
• Self-defense can legally justify your actions, resulting in dismissal or acquittal
• Mutual combat may reduce the severity of charges, or shift prosecutorial strategy

Your lawyer near you will assess whether your case is better framed as a self-defense claim or a mutual combat situation — and may use both strategically during pretrial or trial.

See: Self-Defense in Assault and Aggravated Assault Cases

How Do Prosecutors Respond to Mutual Combat?

Prosecutors in Texas are not obligated to recognize mutual combat as a bar to prosecution. In many cases, they will still charge:

• One participant more severely if the other is injured worse
• Both parties with assault, regardless of consent
• Aggravated Assault if a weapon was involved or serious injury occurred

However, your criminal defense attorney near you can use mutual combat in plea negotiations to argue:

• That both parties share culpability
• That diversion or deferred adjudication is appropriate
• That no single party should carry a criminal record for a consensual altercation

What Kind of Evidence Supports a Mutual Combat Defense?

Mutual combat cases often come down to context. Your attorney may look for evidence such as:

• Witness testimony stating both people agreed to fight
• Body camera footage showing mutual engagement
• Surveillance video confirming equal participation
• Lack of clear aggressor behavior
• Text messages, social media posts, or prior history between the parties

See: Body Cam, Surveillance Footage, and Digital Evidence in Assault Cases

Can You Still Be Convicted If Mutual Combat Is Proven?

Yes — proving mutual combat does not automatically prevent conviction. However, it can:

• Reduce the charge severity (from Class A to Class C, or from felony to misdemeanor)
• Influence sentencing and probation terms
• Support an argument for pretrial diversion or deferred adjudication
• Undermine the prosecutor’s theory that the defendant was the sole aggressor

A strategic lawyer near you can use this to negotiate better outcomes or raise doubt at trial.

What If the Other Party Was Injured More Seriously?

In cases where the alleged victim suffered more severe injuries, prosecutors may argue that mutual combat is irrelevant because of disproportionate force. But this can be countered if:

• The other party initiated or escalated the fight
• You used force proportional to the threat
• Injuries were incidental, not intentional
• The injured party was equally engaged in the fight

In these cases, your attorney near you can reframe the narrative around shared risk and voluntary engagement, rather than aggression.

Mutual Combat in Domestic Assault or Family Violence Cases

Mutual combat defenses can be harder to assert in family violence cases, where courts are more protective of alleged victims. However, in some cases:

• Both parties were physically involved
• No injury was present
• Witnesses confirm mutual aggression

Your lawyer near you can still raise mutual combat to argue against sole blame, resist protective orders, and reduce the stigma of a family violence designation.

See: Can You Be Charged Without the Victim’s Cooperation?

Final Thoughts: Mutual Combat Doesn’t Eliminate Risk — But It Can Change the Outcome

If you’ve been charged with assault in a situation where both parties were involved in the fight, don’t assume the law will see it that way without a strong defense.

Mutual combat is a complex, fact-driven defense that must be raised and framed strategically. A knowledgeable criminal defense attorney near you can present the right evidence, argue proportionality, and push back on a one-sided prosecution narrative.

Call Walker Law Office today at (713) 228-2611 or visit https://www.walkerlawhouston.com/contact/ to speak with an experienced attorney near you who can evaluate whether mutual combat applies to your assault case.

‍