LEGISLATIVE BUDGET BOARD
Austin, Texas
FISCAL NOTE, 76th Regular Session
April 6, 1999
TO: Honorable Ken Armbrister, Chair, Senate Committee on
Criminal Justice
FROM: John Keel, Director, Legislative Budget Board
IN RE: SB840 by West, Royce (Relating to the automatic
expunction of certain arrest records.), As Introduced
**************************************************************************
* Estimated Two-year Net Impact to General Revenue Related Funds for *
* SB840, As Introduced: negative impact of $(443,657) through the *
* biennium ending August 31, 2001. *
* *
* The bill would make no appropriation but could provide the legal *
* basis for an appropriation of funds to implement the provisions of *
* the bill. *
**************************************************************************
General Revenue-Related Funds, Five-Year Impact:
****************************************************
* Fiscal Year Probable Net Positive/(Negative) *
* Impact to General Revenue Related *
* Funds *
* 2000 $(234,874) *
* 2001 (208,783) *
* 2002 (208,783) *
* 2003 (208,783) *
* 2004 (208,783) *
****************************************************
All Funds, Five-Year Impact:
***************************************************************************
*Fiscal Probable Savings/(Cost) from Change in Number of State *
* Year General Revenue Fund Employees from FY 1999 *
* 0001 *
* 2000 $(234,874) 5.0 *
* 2001 (208,783) 5.0 *
* 2002 (208,783) 5.0 *
* 2003 (208,783) 5.0 *
* 2004 (208,783) 5.0 *
***************************************************************************
Technology Impact
Technology impact would be limited to microcomputer hardware and software
for 5 full-time equivalent employees estimated at $18,927.
Fiscal Analysis
The bill would allow a person who has been arrested for commission of
either a felony or misdemeanor to have all records and files relating to
an arrest expunged if an indictment or information charging the person
with commission of a felony has not been presented against the person
before the expiration of the statute of limitations. The bill would
also allow that, if a person has been released and the charge, if any,
has not resulted in a final conviction, is no longer pending, and there
was no court-ordered community supervision, then the records and files
relating to the arrest can also be expunged. The bill would direct the
trial court to enter an order of expunction for a person pardoned or
acquitted. The bill would direct the attorney representing the state to
bring a motion for expunction due to expiration of the statute of
limitations. The bill would also allow a person entitled to an
expunction to file an ex parte petition in a district court for the
county in which the person was arrested.
Methodology
It is estimated that 4,000 new expunction cases per year (100% of the
current caseload) would result from enactment of the bill. The
Department uses five employees to process the current caseload.
Accordingly, it is estimated that five additional FTESs would be needed
to process the new expunction petitions/orders: one Records Technician
I, one Expunction Coordinator, one Administrative Technician II (Error
Resolution), one Legal Assistant, and one Attorney V.
Local Government Impact
The bill would increase workload for both the office of the attorney
representing the state and the trial court. The fiscal impact on local
government would be dependent on the number of felony arrests and
indictments that occur annually in the county.
Source Agencies:
LBB Staff: JK, MD, BP, VS