Sec. 7. When the issue is raised by the evidence, the trial judge shall appropriately instruct the jury, generally, on the law pertaining to such statement.
Sec. 8. Notwithstanding any other provision of this article, a written, oral, or sign language statement of an accused made as a result of a custodial interrogation is admissible against the accused in a criminal proceeding in this state if:
(1) the statement was obtained in another state and was obtained in compliance with the laws of that state or this state;  or
(2) the statement was obtained by a federal law enforcement officer in this state or another state and was obtained in compliance with the laws of the United States.

Text of section effective until January 01, 2025

Sec. 9.  Notwithstanding any other provision of this article, no oral, sign language, or written statement that is made by a person accused of an offense listed in Article 2.32(b) and made as a result of a custodial interrogation occurring in a place of detention, as that term is defined by Article 2.32, is admissible against the accused in a criminal proceeding unless:

Text of subdivision effective until January 01, 2025

(1)  an electronic recording was made of the statement, as required by Article 2.32(b); or

Text of subdivision effective until January 01, 2025

(2)  the attorney representing the state offers proof satisfactory to the court that good cause, as described by Article 2.32(d), existed that made electronic recording of the custodial interrogation infeasible.

Text of section effective on January 01, 2025

Sec. 9.  Notwithstanding any other provision of this article, no oral, sign language, or written statement that is made by a person accused of an offense listed in Article 2B.0202(a) and made as a result of a custodial interrogation occurring in a place of detention, as defined by Article 2B.0201, is admissible against the accused in a criminal proceeding unless:

Text of subdivision effective on January 01, 2025

(1)  an electronic recording was made of the statement, as required by Article 2B.0202(a); or

Text of subdivision effective on January 01, 2025

(2)  the attorney representing the state offers proof satisfactory to the court that good cause, as described by Article 2B.0202(c), existed that made electronic recording of the custodial interrogation infeasible.