BILL ANALYSIS |
C.S.S.B. 462 |
By: Huffman |
Judiciary & Civil Jurisprudence |
Committee Report (Substituted) |
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE
Interested parties observe that the use of specialty courts in Texas began over two decades ago with the establishment of the first drug court. Those parties further observe that the drug court model has often been replicated since then in order to divert nonviolent offenders suffering from mental health or substance abuse issues from the criminal justice system intensive treatment programs. Concerns have been raised that although government funding has been directed to drug courts, performance measures were not established to determine the success and cost-effectiveness of the use of specialty courts in Texas. There is additional concern that the state laws governing the various types of specialty courts are not codified in a common place in statute for ease of reference for judges and specialty court team professionals.
C.S.S.B. 462 seeks to consolidate Texas statutes relating to specialty drug courts, improve oversight of specialty court programs, and change the composition of the governor's Specialty Courts Advisory Council.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
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.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ANALYSIS
C.S.S.B. 462 amends the Government Code and transfers provisions relating to family drug court programs, drug court programs, veterans court programs, and mental health court programs from the Family Code and the Health and Safety Code to the Government Code in order to consolidate statutory provisions relating to specialty courts. The bill removes provisions relating to program oversight that apply to each type of program individually and instead sets out oversight provisions applicable to all of those specialty courts, provisions authorizing the lieutenant governor and the speaker of the house of representatives to assign to appropriate legislative committees duties relating to the oversight of specialty court programs, and provisions authorizing the governor or a legislative committee to request the state auditor to perform a management, operations, or financial or accounting audit of a specialty court program for the purpose of determining the eligibility of the specialty court program to receive state or federal grant funds administered by a state agency.
C.S.S.B. 462 prohibits a specialty court program from operating until the judge, magistrate, or coordinator provides to the criminal justice division of the governor's office written notice of the program, any resolution or other official declaration under which the program was established, and a copy of the applicable community justice plan that incorporates duties related to supervision that will be required under the program, and the judge, magistrate, or coordinator receives from the division written verification of the program's compliance with that requirement. The bill requires a specialty court program to comply with all programmatic best practices recommended by the Specialty Courts Advisory Council and approved by the Texas Judicial Council and to report to the criminal justice division any information required by the division regarding the performance of the program. The bill makes a specialty court program that fails to comply with such requirements ineligible to receive any state or federal grant funds administered by any state agency.
C.S.S.B. 462 changes the circumstances under which a court is required to enter an order of nondisclosure for a defendant who successfully completes a drug court program with respect to all records and files related to the defendant's arrest for the offense for which the defendant entered the program. The bill requires the court to enter such an order if the defendant has not been previously convicted of an offense for which a judge is prohibited from ordering community supervision or of a sexually violent offense and is not convicted for any felony offense between the date on which the defendant successfully completed the program and the second anniversary of that date, rather than if the defendant has not been previously convicted of a felony offense and is not convicted for any other felony offense before the second anniversary of successful program completion.
C.S.S.B. 462 requires the commissioners court of a county with a population of more than 200,000 that is required to establish a drug court program to direct the judge, magistrate, or coordinator to comply with the bill's requirement to provide specified notice and documents to the criminal justice division of the governor's office. The bill makes the requirement for the county to establish a drug court program contingent on the judge, magistrate, or coordinator receiving verification from the criminal justice division of the program's compliance.
C.S.S.B. 462 establishes that, for purposes of provisions governing veterans court programs, each county that elects to establish a regional veterans court program is considered to have established the program and is entitled to retain fees collected on certain intoxication and drug convictions in the same manner as if the county had established a veterans court program without participating in a regional program.
C.S.S.B. 462 requires a community justice plan submitted for a community supervision and corrections department to include a separate description of any services the department intends to provide in relation to a specialty court program.
C.S.S.B. 462 revises provisions relating to the Specialty Courts Advisory Council that the governor is required to establish within the criminal justice division of the governor's office. The bill expands the definition of "specialty court" for such purposes to include a family drug court program. The bill expands the duties of the council to include making recommendations to the division regarding best practices for specialty courts. The bill increases from seven to nine the number of council members by adding one member who represents the public and one member with experience as the judge of a specialty court. The bill requires each type of specialty court to be represented by the members with experience as a specialty court judge. The bill requires the governor to appoint the two additional members promptly after the bill takes effect and provides for the expiration dates of those members' terms. The bill establishes that the changes made to the qualifications of council members do not affect the entitlement of a member serving on the council immediately before the bill's effective date to continue to serve and function as a member of the council for the remainder of the member's term. The bill establishes that the changes to the qualifications apply only to a member appointed on or after September 1, 2013, but requires the governor to make additional appointments to the council as necessary as the terms of the members serving immediately before that date expire or become vacant. The bill prohibits a member of the council from receiving compensation for service on the council and authorizes the members to receive reimbursement from the criminal justice division for actual and necessary expenses incurred in performing council functions.
C.S.S.B. 462 amends the Code of Criminal Procedure, the Family Code, and the Government Code to make conforming changes.
C.S.S.B. 462 repeals Sections 103.029 and 103.0291, Government Code.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
EFFECTIVE DATE
September 1, 2013.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
COMPARISON OF ORIGINAL AND SUBSTITUTE
While C.S.S.B. 462 may differ from the engrossed version in minor or nonsubstantive ways, the following comparison is organized and highlighted in a manner that indicates the substantial differences between the engrossed and committee substitute versions of the bill.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|