BILL ANALYSIS

 

 

 

C.S.H.B. 1741

By: Johnson

Public Health

Committee Report (Substituted)

 

 

 

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

 

Under current law, courts may order outpatient or community-based treatment and supervision for an acquitted individual found not guilty by reason of insanity, and that treatment and supervision may be provided in any county where the necessary resources are available. The bill author informed the committee that the lack of clear procedures for out-of-county commitments raises public safety concerns with issues such as a lack of supervision by the local probation office due to the case remaining under the jurisdiction of the originating court, lack of involvement by the applicable facility administrator in the development of a treatment plan, and lack of a requirement for an individual to have any connection or nexus to a county where the individual will be committed. C.S.H.B. 1741 seeks to address these issues by allowing parties in a proceeding relating to the disposition of a person following acquittal by reason of insanity to file a motion to transfer jurisdiction over the person to a county other than the county in which the committing court is located, subject to certain conditions.

 

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. 1741 amends the Code of Criminal Procedure to authorize either party in a proceeding relating to the disposition of a person following acquittal by reason of insanity to file a motion to transfer jurisdiction over the person to a county other than the county in which the committing court is located under the following conditions:

·       outpatient or community-based treatment and supervision are ordered for the person; and

·       inpatient treatment has previously been ordered for the person and the person is seeking to modify that order for the purpose of receiving outpatient or community-based treatment and supervision.

The bill requires the motion to be filed in the county to which the transfer is sought and in a court with jurisdiction over the category of offense of which the person was acquitted. The motion must include the following:

·       a statement that the local mental health authority (LMHA) or the local intellectual and developmental disability authority (LIDDA) in the proposed county has been notified;

·       for an acquitted person who has previously been ordered to receive inpatient treatment and is seeking to modify that order for the purpose of receiving outpatient or community-based treatment and supervisions, a statement that the person's treatment and supervision can be safely and effectively provided as outpatient or community-based treatment and supervision;

·       the factors that create a nexus between the acquitted person and the proposed county that would add stability and support for the person; and

·       any other factors that support the transfer and any modification to an existing order for inpatient treatment, as applicable.

 

C.S.H.B. 1741 requires the court in which the motion is filed, not later than the 21st day after the date such motion is filed, to conduct a hearing on the motion. The bill requires the court to accept jurisdiction over the acquitted person if the court, after the hearing, determines the following:

·       an acquitted person who has previously been ordered to receive inpatient treatment and is seeking to modify that order for the purpose of receiving outpatient or communitybased treatment and supervisions can be safely and effectively provided treatment and supervision as outpatient or community-based treatment and supervision; and

·       the acquitted person has a nexus with the proposed county, as demonstrated by: 

o   a support network for the acquitted person in that county, including family and friends;

o   the acquitted person having previously received mental health services from the LMHA or intellectual and developmental disability services from the LIDDA in the proposed county at any time during the five-year period preceding the date of the person's acquittal; or

o   other factors that the court considers relevant.

The bill requires the committing court, once the court accepts jurisdiction over the acquitted person, to transfer the case to the receiving court.

 

C.S.H.B. 1741 defines "local intellectual and developmental disability authority" and "local mental health authority" by reference to Health and Safety Code provisions generally applicable to mental health and intellectual disability services for purposes of the bill's provisions relating to the transfer of jurisdiction over an acquitted person for purposes of outpatient or community‑based treatment and supervisions and establishes that those provisions apply only with respect to an acquitted person for whom such treatment and supervision is sought to be provided in a county other than the county in which the committing court is located.

 

C.S.H.B. 1741 replaces the authorization for a court to order outpatient or community-based treatment and supervision for a person acquitted by reason of insanity to be provided in any appropriate county where the necessary resources are available with an authorization for court‑ordered outpatient or community-based treatment and supervision to be provided to the acquitted person in any such county, except that if the court-ordered outpatient or community‑based treatment and supervision is to be provided in a county other than the county in which the committing court is located, the jurisdiction over the acquitted person must be transferred in accordance with the bill's provisions.

 

C.S.H.B. 1741 applies to any defendant who is subject to insanity defense proceedings before, on, or after the bill's effective date. For a person who committed any element of the offense before September 1, 2005, the bill's provisions regarding those proceedings govern an initial determination of not guilty by reason of insanity and any subsequent proceedings that occur in relation to such a determination made under applicable state law, including commitment hearings, recommitment hearings, and court orders requiring participation in outpatient or community-based treatment and supervision.

 

EFFECTIVE DATE

 

September 1, 2025.

 

COMPARISON OF INTRODUCED AND SUBSTITUTE

 

While C.S.H.B. 1741 may differ from the introduced in minor or nonsubstantive ways, the following summarizes the substantial differences between the introduced and committee substitute versions of the bill.

 

Both the introduced and the substitute replace the authorization for a court to order outpatient or community-based treatment and supervision for a person acquitted by reason of insanity to be provided in any appropriate county where the necessary resources are available. However, the introduced and the substitute differ as follows:

·       the introduced replaced that provision with an authorization for court-ordered outpatient or community-based treatment and supervision to be provided to the acquitted person only in a county in which necessary resources are available and in which the person was acquitted or the court receiving jurisdiction over the person under the bill's provisions is located; and

·       the substitute replaces that provision instead with an authorization for court-ordered outpatient or community-based treatment and supervision to be provided to the acquitted person in any appropriate county where the necessary resources are available, except that if the court-ordered outpatient or community-based treatment and supervision is to be provided in a county other than the county in which the committing court is located, the jurisdiction over the acquitted person must be transferred in accordance with the bill's provisions.

 

The substitute includes definitions absent from the introduced for "local intellectual and developmental disability authority" and "local mental health authority" by reference, which did not appear in the introduced.

 

The substitute includes a provision absent from the introduced authorizing either party in a proceeding relating to the disposition of a person following acquittal by reason of insanity to file a motion to transfer, to a county other than the county in which the committing court is located, jurisdiction over an acquitted person who has previously been ordered to receive inpatient treatment and is seeking to modify that order for the purpose of receiving outpatient or community-based treatment and supervision.

 

The substitute does the following with respect to the introduced version's requirement for a motion to include certain information:

·       does not include the requirement present in the introduced for the motion to include a description of the alternative placements in the county of the committing court, as considered by the parties, and why the placements are unsuitable;

·       requires the inclusion of the following additional information, which the introduced did not require:

o   a statement that the LIDDA in the proposed county has been notified, as applicable;

o   for an acquitted person who has previously been ordered to receive inpatient treatment and is seeking to modify that order for the purpose of receiving outpatient or community-based treatment and supervision, a statement that the person's treatment and supervision can be safely and effectively provided as outpatient or community-based treatment and supervision; and

o   any modification to an existing order for inpatient treatment, as applicable.

 

The substitute changes the date by which a court must conduct a hearing on the motion to transfer from not later than the 45th day after the date the motion is filed, as in the introduced, to not later than the 21st day after that date.

 

The substitute includes a provision absent from the introduced specifying that the court required to conduct the hearing is the court in which the motion is filed.

The substitute replaces a requirement in the introduced for the court to consider certain factors in determining whether to accept jurisdiction over the acquitted person with a requirement for the court to accept the jurisdiction over the acquitted person if the court, after the hearing, determines the following:

·       the acquitted person who has previously been ordered to receive inpatient treatment and is seeking to modify that order for the purpose of receiving outpatient or community‑based treatment and supervision can be safely and effectively provided treatment and supervision as outpatient or community-based treatment and supervision; and

·       the acquitted person has a nexus with the proposed county.

 

Whereas the introduced required the committing court, after the court makes a determination that accepting jurisdiction over the acquitted person is appropriate, to transfer the case to that court, the substitute requires the committing court, once a court accepts jurisdiction over the acquitted person, to transfer the case to the receiving court.

 

The substitute omits provisions from the introduced that did the following:

·       required the acquitted person's discharge planning, after the case is transferred, to be completed by the court accepting jurisdiction and the applicable LMHA and state hospital serving the county in which that court is located;

·       required the Health and Human Services Commission (HHSC) to conduct a study on persons who were, during the period beginning on September 1, 2005, and ending on August 31, 2026, found not guilty by reason of insanity and ordered by the court to participate in outpatient or community-based treatment and supervision;

·       required HHSC, not later than December 1, 2026, to prepare and submit to the legislature a written report containing the results of the study and any recommendations for legislative or other action; and

·       specified the information the report must include with regard to certain acquitted persons.