Section 25.10 protects court-ordered guardianships of the person. In practice it is a family statute: the accused is almost always a relative who disagrees with the guardian's decisions about where the ward should live or who should see them.
What the Statute Says
(b) A person commits an offense if the person takes, retains, or conceals a ward when the person knows that the person's taking, retention, or concealment interferes with a possessory right with respect to the ward.
(c) An offense under this section is a state jail felony.
"Possessory right" means the right of a guardian of the person to have physical possession of a ward and to establish the ward's legal domicile, as provided by Section 1151.051(c)(1) of the Estates Code. "Ward" carries the meaning assigned by Chapter 1002 of the Estates Code.
Subsection (d) excludes governmental entities where the taking, retention, or concealment was authorized by Subtitle E, Title 5 of the Family Code or Chapter 48 of the Human Resources Code — which covers Adult Protective Services and child welfare interventions.
How These Cases Arise
An elderly parent is placed under guardianship. One adult child is appointed guardian; another believes the ward is being isolated, mistreated, or placed in the wrong facility. That sibling picks the parent up for a visit and does not bring them back, or moves them to their own home. The guardian calls police, and a state jail felony charge follows.
The same pattern occurs with wards who have intellectual or developmental disabilities, where a family member disagrees with a guardian's residential decision.
The Knowledge Element
The statute requires that the person knows the taking, retention, or concealment interferes with a possessory right. That element is genuinely contested more often than prosecutors assume:
- Was the person aware a guardianship existed? Guardianship proceedings frequently occur without the participation or notice of every relative.
- Did they know its terms? A guardian of the estate has different powers than a guardian of the person. Limited guardianships restrict only specified rights.
- Was the guardianship still in effect? Guardianships are modified, restricted, and terminated. Orders in place months earlier may no longer control.
Other Defenses
The ward's own wishes and capacity. A ward under a limited guardianship may retain the right to decide where to live. Where the ward went voluntarily and retained that right, the possessory-right element is weak.
No interference in fact. A visit that ran long, a medical appointment, or a hospitalization is not concealment.
Emergency and necessity. Where the relative acted to protect the ward from immediate harm, Section 9.22 may apply — and a contemporaneous report to Adult Protective Services is powerful corroboration.
The right remedy is civil. These disputes belong in the probate court that created the guardianship. A motion to modify or remove the guardian is both the lawful route and, usually, the more effective one.
Related
- Section 25.03 — interference with child custody · Section 25.031 — agreement to abduct from custody
- Unlawful restraint (20.02)
- Exploitation of a child, elderly or disabled individual (32.53)
Charged in Harris County?
Brian Foley is Board Certified in Criminal Law by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization and a former Harris County Felony Chief Prosecutor; Luis Baez is a former Trial Bureau Chief. Call or text (713) 703-1718 for a free, confidential consultation.