BILL ANALYSIS
C.S.H.B. 1901
By: Combs
04-19-95
Committee Report (Substituted)
BACKGROUND
Currently, the State may not seek additional search warrants under
Article 18.02(10) to search the same person, place or thing for
evidence of a crime once an evidentiary search warrant has been
executed. This is true regardless of whether probable cause exists
for the subsequent search. This prohibition hinders the ability of
law enforcement in Texas from administering the criminal laws of
this state.
Current law prevents the State from seeking a second or subsequent
search warrant when:
1. new evidence is uncovered after the execution of the first
evidentiary search warrant is executed. This might occur, for
example, when a search has already been conducted for a sample
of a person's blood and, subsequent to the search, additional
forensic evidence is discovered which requires different or
additional evidence from the same person for scientific
comparison;
2. through honest mistake or accident, a sample of blood or
other such evidence is lost, contaminated, improperly
extracted or otherwise rendered unusable and a new sample is
required;
3. new technology enables testing which was not available at
the time that the initial evidentiary search warrant was
executed. This is especially critical given the rapidly
developing technology of DNA testing;
4. an initial evidentiary search warrant reveals evidence of
a crime which was not anticipated or enumerated in the search
warrant.
PURPOSE
If enacted, C.S.H.B. 1901 would allow the state to seek subsequent
evidentiary search warrants under Article 18.02(10), Code of
Criminal Procedure, only under limited circumstances.
RULEMAKING AUTHORITY
It is the committee's opinion that this bill does not expressly
grant any additional rulemaking authority to a state officer,
department, agency, or institution.
SECTION BY SECTION ANALYSIS
SECTION 1. Amends Article 18.01, Code of Criminal Procedure
(SEARCH WARRANT), by amending Subsections (c), (d) and (i) as
follows:
(c) adds Subsection (d) to those excepted from the provisions
of this section.
(d) allows for subsequent search warrants to be issued only if
issued by certain court judges.
(i) makes section inapplicable to subsequent search warrants
under Subdivision (10), Article 18.02, Code of Criminal
Procedure.
SECTION 2. Change in law made by this Act applies regardless of
whether a search warrant under Subdivision (10), Article 18.02,
Code of Criminal Procedure, was issued before, on, or after the
effective date of the Act.
SECTION 3. Effective date: September 1, 1995.
SECTION 4. Emergency clause.
COMPARISON OR SUBSTITUTE TO ORIGINAL
While the original bill eliminated the prohibition against the
state's seeking subsequent evidentiary search warrants, the
substitute makes certain exceptions in which they are allowed. The
substitute makes Subsection 18.01(i), Code of Criminal Procedure,
inapplicable to subsequent search warrants under Subdivision (10),
Article 18.02, Code of Criminal Procedure.
The change in law made by the substitute applies retroactively.
The substitute strikes the prospective applicability clause.
SUMMARY OF COMMITTEE ACTION
HB 1901 was considered by the full committee in a public hearing on
April 19, 1994. The following person testified for the bill:
Barry Macha, Wichita County Criminal District Attorney,
representing himself.
The following person testified against the bill:
Keith Hampton, representing TCDLA.
The following persons testified on the bill:
Lon Curtis, representing TDCAA;
J. R. (Ron) Urbanovsky, a resource person from the Texas
Department of Public Safety;
Ross Rayburn, a resource person from the Office of the
Attorney General;
Judge Jade Meeker, a resource person from the Travis County
Court House.
The committee considered a complete substitute for the bill. An
amendment was offered to the substitute. The amendment was adopted
by a non-record vote. The substitute, as amended, was adopted by
a non-record vote. HB 1901 was reported favorably as substituted,
with the recommendation that it do pass and be printed, by a record
vote of 6 ayes, 0 nays, 0 pnv, and 3 absent.