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.