LEGISLATIVE BUDGET BOARD
Austin, Texas
FISCAL NOTE
74th Regular Session
March 30, 1995
TO: Honorable Allen Place, Chair IN RE: House Bill No. 3
Committee on Criminal Jurisprudence By: Gallego, et al.
House of Representatives
Austin, Texas
FROM: John Keel, Director
In response to your request for a Fiscal Note on House Bill No. 3
(Relating to procedures for applying for a writ of habeas corpus
by persons convicted of a felony and procedures for the
compensation and appointment of counsel to represent certain
persons charged with a capital felony.) this office has
determined the following:
The bill would make no appropriation but could provide the legal
basis for an appropriation of funds to implement the provisions
of the bill.
The bill provides for state habeas corpus review to proceed
simultaneously with the direct appeal, limits an inmate who
receives the death penalty to one state habeas application, and
provides for the appointment of counsel in state habeas review.
Costs to the state will be incurred due to the hiring of counsel
in the state habeas review, however, a corresponding savings will
occur due to the reduction in the amount of time inmates spend on
death row.
The probable fiscal implication of implementing the provisions of
the bill during each of the first five years following passage
is estimated as follows:
Fiscal Probable
Year Cost/(Savings)
to General
Revenue
Fund 001
1996 $1,204,750
1997 (1,875,250)
1998 (2,645,250)
1999 (2,205,250)
2000 (1,765,250)
Similar annual fiscal implications would continue as long as the
provisions of the bill are in effect.
The fiscal implication to units of local government cannot be
determined.
Source: Office of the Attorney General, Court of Criminal
Appeals
LBB Staff: JK, DC, GG, RR