BILL ANALYSIS |
C.S.H.B. 452 |
By: Alonzo |
Criminal Jurisprudence |
Committee Report (Substituted) |
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE
Interested parties assert that a recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling held that rules of evidence normally applicable in criminal jury trials do not operate with full force at hearings before a judge to determine the admissibility of evidence. Furthermore, these parties point to a ruling by the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals that, because suppression hearings involve the determination of preliminary questions concerning the admissibility of evidence, the language of the current rules indicates that the rules of evidence no longer apply to suppression hearings. The parties further note that a court is currently authorized but not required to hold a pretrial hearing in a criminal case, which allows for the potential refusal of a pretrial hearing and may force parties to trial even when the only disputed issue is a pretrial issue. C.S.H.B. 452 seeks to remedy this situation.
|
||||||||
CRIMINAL JUSTICE IMPACT
It is the committee's opinion that this bill does not expressly create a criminal offense, increase the punishment for an existing criminal offense or category of offenses, or change the eligibility of a person for community supervision, parole, or mandatory supervision.
|
||||||||
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.H.B. 452 amends the Code of Criminal Procedure to require a court to set a pretrial hearing in a criminal case if the defendant requests the hearing not later than the 60th day before the date on which trial commences. The bill requires the court to hold the requested hearing not later than the 30th day before the date on which trial commences and, to the extent feasible, to rule at the hearing on all pretrial motions filed in the case. The bill entitles the defendant, if the court fails to hold a pretrial hearing as required, to a continuance of the trial setting to a date not later than the 30th day after the date on which the court holds the pretrial hearing. The bill specifies that the failure of the court to comply with these pretrial hearing requirements is not grounds for dismissal of a case against a defendant and prohibits the court from sustaining a motion to set aside an indictment, information, or complaint for failure to provide a speedy trial based solely on the court's failure to comply with the pretrial hearing requirements. The bill exempts from its provisions a case in which the offense is punishable by fine only, is punishable by a fine and a sanction not consisting of confinement or imprisonment, or is an offense under Alcoholic Beverage Code provisions relating to age the punishment for which does not include confinement as an authorized sanction.
|
||||||||
EFFECTIVE DATE
September 1, 2015.
|
||||||||
COMPARISON OF ORIGINAL AND SUBSTITUTE
While C.S.H.B. 452 may differ from the original in minor or nonsubstantive ways, the following comparison is organized and formatted in a manner that indicates the substantial differences between the introduced and committee substitute versions of the bill.
|
||||||||
|