BILL ANALYSIS H.B. 3073 By: Gallego C.S.H.B. 3073 By: Thompson 4-25-95 Committee Report (Substituted) BACKGROUND Currently, a court of appeals has no jurisdiction over the legal functions of a magistrate. Because of this lack of power, cases that involve an appeal must be kicked back to the lower court, and are then referred to the court of criminal appeals. This time consuming process can cause a case to be dismissed because the governing statute expires. What is necessary is a statute that gives a court of appeal the jurisdiction over a district judge acting as a magistrate at a court of inquiry in the court of appeals district. PURPOSE This bill allows an appeals court to issue all writs of mandamus against a judge of a district court who is acting as a magistrate at a court of inquiry in the appellate district. 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 Government Code Section 22.221(b) to provide that each court of appeals can issue writs of mandamus against a district judge acting as a magistrate pursuant to Chapter 52 of the Code of Criminal Procedure as well as a judge of a district or county court in the appellate district. SECTION 2. Application of act. SECTION 3. Effective date. SECTION 4. Emergency clause. COMPARISON OF ORIGINAL TO SUBSTITUTE Section 1 of the substitute substitutes "acting as a magistrate" for "in the capacity of a magistrate" and replaces "pursuant to Chapter 52" with "under Chapter 52". Section 2 of the substitute replaces references to "cases" with "proceedings". Sections 3 and 4 are the same in both versions. SUMMARY OF COMMITTEE ACTION Pursuant to a public notice posted on April 20, 1995, the Committee on Judicial Affairs met in a public hearing on April 25, 1995, to consider H.B. 3073. The Chair laid out H.B. 3073 and recognized the author, Rep. Gallego, to explain the bill. The Chair offered and laid out a complete committee substitute. The Chair recognized Rep. Gallego to explain the substitute. There were no witnesses to testify. The Chair moved adoption of the substitute. There being no objection, the substitute was adopted. The Chair moved that H.B. 3073, as substituted, be reported favorably back to the full House with the recommendation that it do pass, be printed and sent to the Calendars Committee. The motion prevailed by the following record vote: 5 ayes, 0 nays, 1 PNV and 3 absent. Following further discussion, the Chair moved to reconsider the vote on which H.B. 3073, as substituted, passed from committee. There were no objections. The Chair laid out H.B. 3073, as substituted. The Chair moved that H.B. 3073, 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: 6 ayes, 0 nays, 0 PNV and 3 absent.