BILL ANALYSIS |
C.S.H.B. 1258 |
By: Clardy |
Judiciary & Civil Jurisprudence |
Committee Report (Substituted) |
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE
Interested parties assert that state court documents should only be available to the public via electronic database if that database complies with applicable confidentiality and nondisclosure laws and if the documents within are clearly marked as unofficial. C.S.H.B. 1258 seeks to provide for such a database.
|
||||||||||||
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. 1258 amends the Government Code to authorize the Supreme Court of Texas to authorize the Office of Court Administration of the Texas Judicial System (OCA) to establish, operate, and maintain a state court document database and to limit the contents of the database to court documents filed with a court on or after the 60th day following the date on which OCA certifies to the supreme court that the database is fully operational and complies with the bill's provisions and any other documents authorized by the clerk of the court to be maintained in the database. The bill authorizes a person who establishes, maintains, or operates the state court document database for the supreme court to allow public access to a document filed with a court in this state and included in the database only if the database maintains each document included in a manner that complies with federal and state laws and orders of the court in which the document was filed related to confidentiality and nondisclosure of information and if a copy of each page of a document stored in the database clearly states that the document is an unofficial copy of a court document.
C.S.H.B. 1258 requires OCA to collect a fee, in an amount set by supreme court rule after consultation with court clerks, for each page or part of a page of a document electronically accessed by a member of the public from the state court document database and to deliver the collected fees to the clerk of the court in which the document was originally filed for deposit in the county general fund. The bill requires a person who establishes, maintains, or operates the state court document database to comply with the laws, rules, and court orders related to sensitive data and confidential documents that govern court documents in the custody of a court clerk. The bill establishes that a court clerk is not responsible for the management or removal of documents from the state court document database and exempts a court clerk from liability for damages resulting from the release of court documents if the clerk in good faith performs the duties as clerk as provided by law and the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure. The bill establishes that a clerk shows that the clerk acted in good faith when the clerk shows that a reasonably prudent clerk, under the same or similar circumstances, could have believed that the clerk's conduct was justified based on the information the clerk possessed when the conduct occurred.
C.S.H.B. 1258 requires the Department of Public Safety to send all relevant criminal history record information contained in an order of nondisclosure of criminal history record information or a copy of the order to OCA and requires the clerk of a court to send a certified copy of a final order of expunction of criminal records to OCA.
C.S.H.B. 1258 requires the supreme court, not later than December 1, 2017, to adopt the rules, fees, and orders necessary to implement the bill's provisions. The bill applies to a court record filed before, on, or after the bill's effective date unless a restriction on court documents filed before that date would impair a contract entered into before that date.
|
||||||||||||
EFFECTIVE DATE
On passage, or, if the bill does not receive the necessary vote, September 1, 2017.
|
||||||||||||
COMPARISON OF ORIGINAL AND SUBSTITUTE
While C.S.H.B. 1258 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.
|
||||||||||||
|