Criminal solicitation is always a felony in Texas. Penal Code § 15.03 reaches anyone who, intending that a capital or first-degree felony be committed, requests, commands, or attempts to induce another person to commit it. The charge lands one grade below the crime solicited, and § 15.03(b) bars a conviction on the solicited person's uncorroborated word. Below: the statute text, the punishment range, the corroboration rule, defenses, and what to expect in Collin, Dallas, Denton, and Tarrant County.
Free, Confidential Case Review
Tell us what happened. A defense attorney reviews every submission — usually within the hour during business hours.
Published 2026-06-11 · Reviewed by Reggie London and Njeri London, Co-Founding Partners · Last reviewed: 2026-06-11
Peer Recognition
Martindale-Hubbell® 2026 Honors
Independent peer-review ratings recognizing legal ability and ethical standards.
Awards reflect peer-reviewed ratings only. Past results do not guarantee future outcomes.
Controlling statute:Texas Penal Code § 15.03 · companion offense for minors: § 15.031 Classification: First-degree felony if a capital offense is solicited; second-degree felony if a first-degree felony is solicited Punishment range: First-degree — 5 to 99 years or life in prison plus a fine up to $10,000; second-degree — 2 to 20 years plus a fine up to $10,000
What Is Criminal Solicitation Under Texas Law?
Texas Penal Code § 15.03(a) makes it a crime to ask for a serious felony. A person commits criminal solicitation if, "with intent that a capital felony or felony of the first degree be committed, he requests, commands, or attempts to induce another to engage in specific conduct" that would constitute that felony — or make the other person a party to it — under the circumstances as the actor believes them to be. The statute dates to the 1974 Penal Code and has carried the same core structure since.
Three verbs do all the work: request, command, and attempt to induce. No agreement is required. No money has to change hands. The person asked never has to say yes, never has to take a step, and can be lying the entire time. On the State's theory, the crime is the ask itself, made with the intent that the felony actually occur. That is what separates solicitation from criminal conspiracy (which requires an agreement plus an overt act) and from criminal attempt (which requires an act beyond mere preparation).
The scope is narrower than most people expect. Section 15.03 reaches only capital felonies and first-degree felonies. Urging someone to commit a second-degree felony — an ordinary robbery, say — is not criminal solicitation under § 15.03 at all. Prosecutors confronted with that fact pattern must pivot to conspiracy, attempt, or party liability under § 7.02. The legislature drew the line deliberately, and the archetype it had in mind is murder for hire: soliciting what would be capital murder under Penal Code § 19.03(a)(3), murder committed for remuneration.
Section 15.03(c) then closes four escape hatches. It is no defense that the person solicited is not criminally responsible for the felony; that the person solicited was acquitted, never prosecuted, convicted of a different offense, or is immune from prosecution; that the actor belongs to a class of persons legally incapable of committing the solicited offense individually; or that the felony solicited was actually committed. That last one cuts both ways — if the crime went forward, the State usually charges the solicitor as a party to the completed offense, but the solicitation count remains available.
One structural limit worth knowing: Penal Code § 15.05 provides that "attempt or conspiracy to commit, or solicitation of, a preparatory offense defined in this chapter is not an offense." There is no such thing as soliciting a solicitation, or conspiring to attempt. Chapter 15 offenses cannot be stacked on each other.
What Are the Penalties for Criminal Solicitation in Texas?
Solicitation follows a one-grade-down rule: the charge is punished one classification below the felony solicited, per § 15.03(d). Because the statute only reaches capital and first-degree felonies, every § 15.03 case is a first- or second-degree felony — there is no misdemeanor version.
Two penalty wrinkles deserve attention. First, a deadly-weapon finding can attach to a solicitation conviction itself: in Whatley v. State, 946 S.W.2d 73 (Tex. Crim. App. 1997), the Court of Criminal Appeals held that solicitation of capital murder is susceptible to an affirmative deadly-weapon finding, and that merely exhibiting a deadly weapon to the accomplice during the solicitation transaction may be sufficient — the weapon never has to reach the intended victim. That finding carries the parole-eligibility consequences that follow deadly-weapon findings generally. Second, § 15.04(d) gives a convicted defendant a fallback: evidence of renunciation — countermanding the solicitation and making a substantial effort to prevent the crime — is admissible at the punishment hearing, and a renunciation finding drops the punishment one grade lower.
Elements the State Must Prove
To convict under § 15.03, the State must prove every element beyond a reasonable doubt:
1. Intent that a capital or first-degree felony be committed
Specific intent that the crime actually occur — not a joke, a vent, or hypothetical talk. This is where most contested solicitation trials are won or lost.
2. A request, command, or attempt to induce another person
The conduct element. Words alone can satisfy it; so can money, photographs, maps, or a down payment that communicates the ask.
3. Specific conduct that would constitute the felony
What was urged must amount to the capital or first-degree felony — or make the person solicited a party to it. A vague wish that somebody "deal with" a rival is weaker than a request naming a target, a method, and a price.
4. Measured by the circumstances as the actor believed them
The statute uses the defendant's own belief about the surrounding circumstances, which cuts off most impossibility arguments — including that the "hit man" was an officer all along.
5. Corroboration — the conviction prerequisite of § 15.03(b)
Not an element in the indictment, but a statutory bar: no conviction on the uncorroborated testimony of the person allegedly solicited, and the circumstances must strongly corroborate both the solicitation and the intent.
How Do Prosecutors Prove Criminal Solicitation?
Real-world solicitation cases are built on recordings, messages, and money. The typical file contains a cooperating witness or undercover officer, one or more recorded meetings or calls, text messages, cash or something of value changing hands, and documents that personalize the target — photographs, schedules, addresses, sometimes keys or floor plans. Prosecutors layer that evidence because the statute forces them to.
The forcing mechanism is § 15.03(b), the corroboration requirement. A person may not be convicted of criminal solicitation on the uncorroborated testimony of the person allegedly solicited, and the solicitation must be made under circumstances "strongly corroborative" of both the solicitation itself and the actor's intent that the other person act on it. The Court of Criminal Appeals reads § 15.03(b) in conjunction with the accomplice-witness rule of Code of Criminal Procedure article 38.14, and requires the corroboration to link the defendant to the crime at two separate stages — the ask and the intent behind it. Richardson v. State, 700 S.W.2d 591 (Tex. Crim. App. 1985). The word "strongly" does not impose a higher quantum of proof than article 38.14; the added safeguard is that the corroboration must reach both prongs. The working test is the familiar one: set the solicited person's testimony aside and ask whether the remaining evidence tends to connect the defendant to the solicitation and the intent.
The rule applies even when no accomplice is anywhere in the case. In Varvaro v. State, 772 S.W.2d 140 (Tex. App. 1988), the person solicited was an undercover officer — not an accomplice witness as a matter of law — and the court held corroboration was still required, because § 15.03(b) attaches to the "person allegedly solicited" whoever that is. The same case shows how the State satisfies the rule: the meeting was recorded, and the tape of the solicitation itself supplied the corroboration. That is the quiet reason nearly every modern murder-for-hire prosecution is built on a wire. Without a recording, a payment, or independent evidence of intent, the case rests on a single witness the statute says is not enough.
Consider a purely hypothetical example. A Collin County man in a contested divorce tells a coworker he would "pay real money to make this whole thing disappear." The coworker reports it. An undercover officer posing as a contractor meets him twice in a Frisco parking lot; both meetings are recorded, and at the second he hands over $2,500, a photograph of his spouse, and her weekly schedule. The recordings prove the request; the cash and documents corroborate both the solicitation and his intent that the officer act. Contrast a second hypothetical: the same man rants at a bar that his spouse "deserves whatever's coming," names no one, asks nothing of anyone, and pays nothing. There is no request for specific conduct, no corroboration, and no § 15.03 case — however ugly the words.
What Defenses Work Against a Criminal Solicitation Charge?
L and L Law Group builds solicitation defenses around the statute's own pressure points:
Corroboration failure. If the State's case reduces to the solicited person's word, § 15.03(b) bars conviction. The eliminate-and-examine test from Richardson is the framework for a directed-verdict motion at trial and for sufficiency review on appeal — set the witness aside and ask what independently connects the accused to the ask and the intent.
No intent that the crime be committed. Anger, venting, dark humor, and negotiation-table bluster are not solicitation unless the State proves the defendant actually intended the felony to happen. Context, tone, follow-through, and the absence of payment or planning all matter.
No specific conduct solicited. The statute requires urging specific conduct that would constitute the felony. Generalized hostility without a target, method, or object offense leaves the element unproven.
Wrong grade of offense. If the conduct urged would amount only to a second-degree felony or below, § 15.03 does not apply as charged. Indictments occasionally overreach on this scope limit.
Renunciation. The affirmative defense of § 15.04(b), discussed below — countermand plus prevention.
Entrapment. Where the idea, the pressure, and the plan came from law enforcement or its agent, Penal Code § 8.06 provides a defense if the inducement was likely to cause persons to commit the offense — mere opportunity is not enough, but stings that manufacture the crime invite the instruction.
Attribution and authenticity. When the alleged solicitation lives in messages or social-media accounts, forensic work on who actually authored them — device access, account sharing, spoofing — can create reasonable doubt.
The Renunciation Defense — § 15.04
Penal Code § 15.04(b) gives solicitation defendants an affirmative defense: under circumstances manifesting a voluntary and complete renunciation of the criminal objective, the actor countermanded the solicitation before the object offense was committed and took further affirmative action that prevented it. Both pieces are required. Quietly dropping the plan is not a countermand, and a countermand without preventive action is not enough either — think calling the person off and warning the target or the police.
Section 15.04(c) defines away the most common fact patterns. Renunciation is not voluntary if it was motivated in whole or in part by circumstances not present at the start that increase the probability of detection or make the objective harder — backing out because the "contractor" felt like a cop does not qualify — or by a decision to postpone the crime or substitute another victim. Because it is an affirmative defense, the defendant carries the burden of proof by a preponderance of the evidence. Even when the full defense fails, § 15.04(d) makes renunciation evidence admissible at punishment, where a finding drops the sentence one grade.
Criminal Solicitation of a Minor — § 15.031
Penal Code § 15.031 is the companion offense, and it works differently in three ways. First, the menu of solicited offenses is broader: subsection (a) covers soliciting a minor to engage in conduct constituting any offense listed by Code of Criminal Procedure article 42A.054(a) — the so-called "3g" list of serious violent and sexual felonies — while subsection (b) covers soliciting, "by any means," conduct constituting listed sexual offenses including trafficking under § 20A.02(a)(7) or (8), continuous sexual abuse (§ 21.02), indecency with a child (§ 21.11), sexual assault (§ 22.011), aggravated sexual assault (§ 22.021), prostitution offenses (§§ 43.02, 43.021, 43.05(a)(2)), and sexual performance by a child (§ 43.25).
Second, the believed-to-be-a-minor language matters. Subsection (b) reaches a minor or another whom the actor believes to be a minor — which is what allows decoy stings to be charged under it. A "minor" is an individual younger than 17 under § 15.031(f). Third, the grading differs: a § 15.031 offense is one category lower than the offense solicited, but § 15.031(e) restores the full category where the actor was 17 or older, was a member of a criminal street gang as defined by § 71.01, and acted to further the gang's criminal activities or avoid detection as a member. The corroboration safeguard carries over — § 15.031(c) bars conviction on the uncorroborated testimony of the minor allegedly solicited. Online conduct aimed at minors is often charged instead, or additionally, under the separate internet statute discussed at our online solicitation of a minor page.
Can a Criminal Solicitation Charge Be Dismissed or Expunged?
Every § 15.03 case is a felony, so it must pass through a grand jury. A no-bill ends the case before indictment, and corroboration problems are a recurring reason grand juries balk — the State's presentation often leans on the very witness the statute discounts. After indictment, the defense pressure points are the recordings (authentication, completeness, and how they were obtained), the corroboration record, and the intent evidence. Cases with thin corroboration resolve by dismissal or reduction more often than trial dockets suggest, and a directed-verdict motion preserves the § 15.03(b) issue when the State rests.
On records relief: an acquittal, a dismissal without conviction, or a no-bill opens the door to expunction under Code of Criminal Procedure chapter 55A, subject to its waiting periods and conditions — see our expunction overview. A felony conviction is not expunction-eligible, and post-conviction sealing options are narrow; whether any nondisclosure path exists after a deferred-adjudication resolution depends on the offense solicited and the exclusion lists in Government Code chapter 411, so eligibility has to be reviewed case by case.
County-by-County Practice Notes: Collin, Dallas, Denton & Tarrant
Collin County. Solicitation indictments are presented to the grand jury in McKinney and tried in the district courts at the Collin County Courthouse (Russell A. Steindam Courts Building), 2100 Bloomdale Road. Arrests out of Frisco, Plano, McKinney, and Allen route there. These files are recording-heavy, and bond conditions almost always include no contact with the alleged target; GPS monitoring is a common ask from the State in solicitation-of-violence cases. We defend Collin County cases from our Frisco office a few miles down Preston Road.
Dallas County. Felony cases are heard at the Frank Crowley Courts Building on Riverfront Boulevard. Dallas County's volume means solicitation counts often surface inside larger investigations — family-violence prosecutions, organized-crime cases, or jail-call reviews — and the DA's office routinely pairs them with retaliation or obstruction counts under § 36.06 when the alleged target is a witness or officer.
Denton County. Felony dockets sit in the district courts at the Denton County Courts Building in Denton. Cases from Lewisville, Flower Mound, The Colony, and the Denton side of Frisco file there. Magistration and bond practice move quickly; early counsel matters because the recorded-call record is usually complete before the first court setting.
Tarrant County. Felony cases are tried at the Tim Curry Criminal Justice Center in Fort Worth. Tarrant juries hear solicitation cases rarely enough that voir dire on the corroboration instruction — an instruction most jurors have never seen — is a meaningful part of trial strategy.
What Happens After a Criminal Solicitation Arrest? Case Timeline
The sequence tracks any Texas felony, with solicitation-specific wrinkles at almost every step:
Arrest or warrant. Many solicitation cases begin with a sting, so the arrest often happens minutes after the final recorded meeting, with the evidence already packaged.
Magistration. Within roughly 48 hours, a magistrate gives statutory warnings and sets bail under Code of Criminal Procedure article 15.17. Expect higher bond figures where violence was solicited, plus no-contact and monitoring conditions.
Grand jury. Felonies require indictment. The corroboration record matters here — a presentation that leans entirely on the person solicited invites a no-bill.
Discovery. The Michael Morton Act, article 39.14, obligates the State to produce the recordings, informant agreements, and payment evidence. Reviewing the complete recordings — not the excerpts — is where defense theories usually start.
Pretrial motions. Suppression challenges to how recordings and devices were obtained, attacks on authentication, and motions targeting informant credibility and benefits.
Resolution. Dismissal, reduction, plea, or trial. At trial, the corroboration instruction and a directed-verdict motion at the close of the State's case preserve the § 15.03(b) bar.
A charging-pattern note: solicitation counts increasingly come out of recorded jail calls — a defendant awaiting trial who asks someone to intimidate or harm a witness can collect a new first- or second-degree felony plus retaliation exposure under § 36.06, and the call recording itself supplies the corroboration. Nothing said on a jail phone is private.
Collateral Consequences of a Solicitation Conviction
A § 15.03 conviction is a first- or second-degree felony conviction, with everything that follows: firearm disqualification under Penal Code § 46.04 and federal law under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1); license and certification review under Occupations Code chapter 53 for professionals; severe immigration consequences for noncitizens, who should involve immigration counsel before any plea; housing and employment screening barriers; and, where the solicited offense involved family members or witnesses, protective-order and no-contact conditions that outlast the criminal case. Because the conviction names the offense solicited — "solicitation of capital murder" reads exactly that way on a background check — the reputational weight is closer to the object offense than the grade alone suggests.
Solicitation vs. Attempt vs. Conspiracy — and Neighboring Offenses
Chapter 15 punishes three different moments on the road to a crime. Solicitation is the earliest — the ask. Conspiracy is the deal. Attempt is the act. Each is graded one step below the object offense, but the elements and defenses differ:
Agreement that a felony be committed plus an overt act by any conspirator
Felonies
One category lower
Criminal solicitation — § 15.03
Request, command, or attempt to induce, with intent the felony occur
Capital and first-degree felonies only
One grade lower
Watch the name confusion, too. Solicitation of prostitution (§ 43.021) is a different offense entirely — buyer-side conduct, its own state-jail-felony grade. Online solicitation of a minor (§ 33.021) lives in the computer-crimes chapter and overlaps § 15.031 without replacing it. Where the solicited crime was carried out, the State charges the completed offense — see capital murder and murder — with the solicitor liable as a party under § 7.02. And where the person targeted was a witness, prosecutor, judge, or officer, obstruction or retaliation (§ 36.06) frequently rides alongside the solicitation count.
Key Legal Terms
Criminal Solicitation (§ 15.03)
Requesting, commanding, or attempting to induce another to commit a capital or first-degree felony, with intent that the felony be committed. Graded one step below the offense solicited.
Corroboration Requirement (§ 15.03(b))
A statutory bar on convicting anyone of solicitation on the uncorroborated testimony of the person allegedly solicited; independent evidence must strongly corroborate both the solicitation and the intent.
Renunciation (§ 15.04)
An affirmative defense for a defendant who voluntarily and completely renounced the crime: countermanding the solicitation before the offense and taking further affirmative action that prevented it.
One-Grade-Down Rule
The Chapter 15 grading principle: preparatory offenses are punished one classification below the object offense — first-degree for soliciting a capital felony, second-degree for soliciting a first-degree felony.
Criminal Solicitation of a Minor (§ 15.031)
Soliciting a person younger than 17 — or, for listed sexual offenses, someone believed to be a minor — to engage in listed felony conduct; one category lower than the offense solicited, with a street-gang exception.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is criminal solicitation a felony in Texas?
Yes, always. Under Penal Code § 15.03(d), soliciting a capital offense is a first-degree felony (5 to 99 years or life), and soliciting a first-degree felony is a second-degree felony (2 to 20 years). Criminal solicitation of a minor under § 15.031 is one category lower than the offense solicited, with a street-gang exception that restores the full grade.
Can I be convicted if the person I asked never agreed or did anything?
Yes. Nothing in § 15.03(a) requires the listener to agree, accept money, or take a single step. Section 15.03(c) adds that it is no defense that the person solicited was not criminally responsible, was acquitted, was never prosecuted, or that the felony was actually committed. The corroboration rule of § 15.03(b) still protects you from conviction on one witness's word alone.
What is the corroboration requirement in § 15.03(b)?
No one may be convicted of criminal solicitation on the uncorroborated testimony of the person allegedly solicited. The Court of Criminal Appeals reads § 15.03(b) together with the accomplice-witness rule of Code of Criminal Procedure article 38.14: independent evidence must tend to connect the accused to both the solicitation itself and the intent that the other person act on it. Richardson v. State, 700 S.W.2d 591 (Tex. Crim. App. 1985).
Does the corroboration rule apply when the "hit man" was an undercover officer?
Yes. Corroboration is required whether or not the person solicited is an accomplice witness, so a sting officer's testimony alone cannot convict. Varvaro v. State, 772 S.W.2d 140 (Tex. App. 1988). A recording of the solicitation itself can supply the corroboration — which is why nearly every modern murder-for-hire case is built on a wire.
Is asking someone to commit a second-degree felony criminal solicitation?
Not under § 15.03. The statute reaches only capital felonies and first-degree felonies — a deliberate legislative scope limit. Urging a lesser felony may still be prosecuted as criminal conspiracy, criminal attempt, or under party-liability rules, and § 15.031 separately covers soliciting minors for a listed set of offenses.
What is the renunciation defense to a solicitation charge?
Under Penal Code § 15.04(b), it is an affirmative defense that, under circumstances showing a voluntary and complete renunciation, you countermanded your solicitation before the crime was committed and took further affirmative action that prevented it. Backing out because you suspected surveillance is not voluntary under § 15.04(c), and a partial walk-back is not complete.
What is criminal solicitation of a minor under § 15.031?
It is a separate offense: requesting, commanding, or attempting to induce a minor (younger than 17) to engage in conduct constituting an offense listed by Code of Criminal Procedure article 42A.054(a) — or, for a listed set of sexual offenses, soliciting by any means a minor or someone the actor believes to be a minor. The offense is one category lower than the offense solicited under § 15.031(e).
How is solicitation different from criminal attempt and conspiracy?
All three are Chapter 15 preparatory offenses, but they punish different moments. Attempt (§ 15.01) requires an act beyond mere preparation; conspiracy (§ 15.02) requires an agreement plus an overt act; solicitation (§ 15.03) is the ask itself, made with intent that a capital or first-degree felony occur. Attempt and conspiracy drop one category; solicitation drops one grade from the offense solicited.
Can a criminal solicitation charge be expunged in Texas?
If the case ends in acquittal, dismissal without conviction, or a no-bill, an expunction under Code of Criminal Procedure chapter 55A may be available after any waiting period. A felony conviction is not expunction-eligible, and sealing options after a conviction are narrow. Eligibility turns on how the case resolved, so a record review is the first step.
Reggie London co-founded L and L Law Group with a focus on federal criminal defense, complex felony defense, and TEA/SBEC matters. Licensed in Texas, admitted to TXND and TXED.
Njeri London co-founded L and L Law Group with a focus on DWI defense, family violence cases, and juvenile defense. Licensed in Texas, admitted to TXND and TXED.
Charged with Criminal Solicitation? Talk to L and L Law Group.
Co-founding partners Reggie London and Njeri London personally handle every case. Free consultation. Frisco, Texas.
L&L Law Group represents clients across North Texas counties for DWI, assault, drug crimes, juvenile defense, outstanding warrants, bond reduction, and expunction matters.
