BILL ANALYSIS H.B. 2093 By: Thompson C.S.H.B. 2093 By: Thompson 4-4-95 Committee Report (Substituted) BACKGROUND Mental health matters such as emergency detention for mental illness and substance abuse are generally handled by courts with probate jurisdiction. Some feel that except in certain emergency situations the court with probate jurisdiction should retain and issue orders in cases involving mental health matters. PURPOSE The purpose of this bill is to have applications for emergency detention under sections 462.043(a) and Sections 573.012, Health and Safety Code, presented to a court with probate jurisdiction and to have the court staff retain the application to be presented to a judge or magistrate as soon as practicable. The bill also makes changes to allow a judge to handle applications under Section 573.012. 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 Section 462.043(a), Health and Safety Code, to provide that an application for emergency detention must be presented to a court with probate jurisdiction. Also provides that if the judge of the court is not available at the time of the application that the court staff shall retain the application and present it to another judge or a magistrate as soon as practicable. SECTION 2. Amends the heading to Subchapter B, Chapter 573, Health and safety Code to read "JUDGE'S OR MAGISTRATE'S ORDER FOR EMERGENCY APPREHENSION AND DETENTION". SECTION 3. Amends Section 573.012(a), (b), and (d), Health and Safety Code, in subsection: (a) to provide that an application for emergency detention must be presented to a court with probate jurisdiction. Also provides that if the judge of the court is not available at the time of the application that the court staff shall retain the application and present it to another judge or a magistrate as soon as practicable; and in (b) and (d) to allow a judge or magistrate to deny applications or issue orders under these subsections. SECTION 4. Emergency clause. COMPARISON OF ORIGINAL TO SUBSTITUTE In Section 1, the substitute added requirements for an application that a judge in a court with probate jurisdiction may require by administrative order. The substitute also moved new language requiring joint issuance of administrative orders on application presentations in counties with more than one probate court to a new subsection. Section 2 in both versions is the same. In Section 3, the substitute added requirements for an application that a judge in a court with probate jurisdiction may require by administrative order. The substitute also moved new language requiring joint issuance of administrative orders on application presentations in counties with more than one probate court to a new subsection. Section 4 is the same in both versions. SUMMARY OF COMMITTEE ACTION Pursuant to a public notice posted March 30, 1995, in accordance with House rules, the Committee on Judicial Affairs met in a public hearing to consider House Bill 2093. The Chair laid out H.B. 2093 and explained the bill. The Honorable Jim Scanlan, probate judge, testified for H.B. 2093. Rep. Thompson offered a complete committee substitute. There being no objection, the Chair laid out C.S.H.B. 2093 and recognized Rep. Thompson to explain. Rep. Willis moved to adopt the substitute for H.B. 2093. There being no objection, the substitute was adopted. The Chair then recognized Judge Don Windle, Denton County Court at Law #3, representing himself and the Texas Association of County Court at Law Judges, to testify for the bill. Rep. Willis moved that H.B. 2093, as substituted, be reported favorably back to the full House with the recommendation that it do pass, be printed and sent to the Local & Consent Calendars Committee. The motion prevailed by the following record vote 7 ayes, 0 nays, 0 PNV and 2 absent.