Texas SB 1333 Squatter Removal: Sheriff or Constable Removal of True Squatters Without Going to Court

Senate Bill 1333, effective September 1, 2025, gave Texas property owners a fast, court-free way to remove true squatters: a sworn complaint to the sheriff or constable, who can then remove the occupant without the owner having to file a forcible detainer action.

The practical use case for SB 1333 is narrower than most property owners assume. We get calls from clients who want to use SB 1333 against former tenants, family members, or contract-for-deed occupants, and we have to explain that SB 1333 specifically excludes those categories. For those situations, the regular Chapter 24 forcible detainer process is still the only path. SB 1333 was Texas’s response to a national wave of viral squatter cases where homeowners discovered strangers living in their properties (sometimes properties under renovation, sometimes inherited homes, sometimes vacation properties) and faced months of eviction proceedings to remove someone who had no lease and no legitimate claim to be there. The law works exactly as intended for true squatters. It does not work, and creates serious legal exposure, when applied to former tenants, family members, or anyone with even a colorable claim to possession. The discussion below addresses how SB 1333 works, who qualifies, and why misusing it can be far more expensive than using the JP eviction route.

What SB 1333 does: at a glance

SB 1333 created a new Chapter 24B of the Texas Property Code, which authorizes the sheriff or constable to remove an unauthorized occupant from residential real property based on a sworn complaint by the property owner.

The procedure:

• The owner submits a sworn complaint to the sheriff or constable of the county where the property is located, on a prescribed form.
• The complaint identifies the property, the unauthorized occupant, and the basis for asserting that the occupant has no lease, license, or other lawful right to be there.
• The sheriff or constable reviews the complaint and, if satisfied, removes the occupant.
• If the occupant disputes the removal, post-removal civil remedies are available, but the removal itself is summary.

Crucially, SB 1333 bypasses Justice Court entirely. There is no forcible detainer filing, no hearing, no waiting period, and no writ of possession. The sheriff or constable is the operative authority.

Who qualifies as a “squatter” under SB 1333

SB 1333 applies only to true squatters, occupants who have no lease, no license, no permission, and no other legal right to be on the property. The statute is narrow by design.

Specifically excluded from SB 1333:

• Current tenants under any form of lease (written or oral, expired or current).
• Former tenants who have not yet been formally evicted, including holdover tenants. A tenant whose lease ended yesterday is still a former tenant, not a squatter.
• Family members of the property owner, including adult children and other relatives living in the property with permission that has lapsed. SB 1333 specifically excludes family-member situations.
• Guests of a current or former tenant. A guest’s status flows from the tenant’s status; if the tenant has any color of right, the guest is not a SB 1333 squatter.
• Co-owners or co-tenants on title. SB 1333 cannot be used to remove someone who has an ownership interest, even a disputed one.
• Occupants under a contract for deed, lease-to-own, or similar arrangement.

The exclusions exist because each of those categories already has a procedural path (eviction for tenants, partition for co-owners, family-court remedies for family disputes) and SB 1333 was not designed to displace those procedures.

The sworn complaint: what it must contain

The SB 1333 sworn complaint typically requires:

• The property owner’s identity and contact information, with proof of ownership (deed, tax record, or similar).
• A description of the property.
• The name of the unauthorized occupant, if known.
• The date the occupant began occupying the property, if known.
• A sworn statement that the owner has not given the occupant a lease, license, or permission to be on the property.
• A sworn statement that the occupant is not a current or former tenant, family member, co-owner, or person with any other legal right to possession.
• Verification under penalty of perjury.

The form and specific content vary by jurisdiction, because different counties and sheriff’s departments have implemented their own intake procedures. Some require additional documentation (utility bills, security camera footage, neighbor affidavits) before they will act on the complaint.

The sworn complaint must be truthful. A property owner who falsely swears that an occupant is a squatter when the occupant is in fact a former tenant or family member faces criminal exposure for perjury and civil exposure for wrongful removal.

When law enforcement will act, and when they won’t

In practice, sheriff’s departments and police agencies in Texas have implemented SB 1333 with caution. The sheriff or constable is the gatekeeper, and the gatekeeper has incentives to avoid getting involved in disputes that should be civil rather than criminal.

Situations where law enforcement typically acts on the SB 1333 complaint:

• Stranger occupancy of vacant or under-renovation properties. Owner returns from vacation or finishes a closing and finds someone living in the home.
• Vacation rental aftermath where a guest refuses to leave after the booking ends. (This is fact-dependent, STR situations sometimes blur tenant-status lines.)
• Inherited property occupancy by an unknown party. Owner inherits property and discovers a stranger has moved in.
• Open trespass where the occupant has no plausible explanation for being there.

Situations where law enforcement typically declines to act on the SB 1333 complaint and refers the owner to the JP eviction process:

• Former tenants or holdover tenants. Even if the lease ended.
• Disputed family situations. Boyfriend/girlfriend break-ups, adult children, in-laws.
• Guests who overstayed. The guest of a tenant flows from the tenant’s status.
• Occupancy with any documentation of permission. A text message saying “you can stay through October” is enough to push the case to JP court.
• Disputed ownership or title situations. Anything involving a contract for deed, an alleged co-ownership claim, or a probate dispute.

A sheriff or constable who is unsure typically says “we can’t get involved, file in JP court.” That is the right answer most of the time. Owners who push law enforcement to act in close cases sometimes prevail in the moment but lose later when the occupant returns with a wrongful-removal claim.

SB 1333 vs. forcible detainer: choosing the right tool

The single most important question in SB 1333 cases is: Is this a true squatter, or a former tenant?

True squatter goes to SB 1333. Fast, court-free, sheriff- or constable-driven.

Former tenant or anyone with color of right goes to JP forcible detainer (with possible SB 38 summary disposition). Slower, but the only legally safe path.

Choosing the wrong tool can be catastrophic. An owner who uses SB 1333 against a former tenant faces:

• Wrongful-removal liability for actual damages, plus potential statutory penalties.
• Lockout liability under § 92.0081 if the property is residential and any landlord-tenant relationship is found to have existed.
• Conversion liability for any of the occupant’s belongings disposed of during removal.
• Attorney’s fees, where statutorily authorized.
• Potential criminal exposure for perjury based on the sworn complaint.

The JP forcible-detainer route under SB 38 with summary disposition is now fast, 21 to 35 days for an uncontested case. The marginal speed advantage of SB 1333 over SB 38 summary disposition is small, and the legal-exposure delta is large. When in doubt, use the JP route.

Common SB 1333 scenarios

Scenario 1: Owner returns from a six-month deployment to find strangers in the house. SB 1333 is the right tool. No lease, no license, no prior tenancy. File the sworn complaint with the local sheriff’s department.

Scenario 2: Owner’s adult son has been living in the rental property for two years without paying rent. This is not an SB 1333 case; it is a family-member situation. Likely requires either a tenant-at-sufferance eviction in JP court or a family-court remedy depending on the specific facts.

Scenario 3: Owner discovers tenant’s friend is still living in the unit a month after the tenant moved out. Not SB 1333 in most cases. The friend’s occupancy was originally permissive (as a tenant’s guest), which means the friend is at most a holdover guest, and the JP eviction route applies.

Scenario 4: Owner’s ex-girlfriend refuses to leave the house she has been living in for six months. Not SB 1333. The arrangement was permissive at some point, and family/relationship dynamics put this firmly in JP-court territory (or potentially family court if there is a marriage or common-law marriage).

Scenario 5: Owner inherits property and a previously unknown person is living there. SB 1333 can apply, but only after verifying that the occupant has no lease, no license, no permission, and no claim of ownership. Inherited properties sometimes have informal tenancies the deceased never documented, so careful inquiry is essential before swearing a complaint.

Scenario 6: Owner’s vacation rental guest refuses to leave after the booking ended. Fact-dependent. Some STR situations are handled under SB 1333, but courts are increasingly treating long-stay STR guests as tenants. See the STR/Airbnb tenant status page.

After the removal: civil exposure and recordkeeping

Even when SB 1333 is correctly applied, the owner should document the situation thoroughly in case the occupant later sues:

• The original sworn complaint, with attached documentation.
• Evidence of ownership (deed, tax record).
• Evidence of no permission (neighbor affidavits, security camera footage, police reports of prior trespass).
• Inventory of any personal property the occupant left behind, with dates and photographs.
• Documentation of how the property was rekeyed and secured after removal.

Personal property left behind by the removed occupant should be handled with care. SB 1333 does address personal property: under Section 24B.003(g), while the sheriff or constable keeps the peace, the owner may remove an occupant’s personal property and place it at or near the property line, and Section 24B.004(b) gives the owner immunity from liability for loss of or damage to that property removed under the chapter. As a practical matter, owners should still document what is removed.