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.