Texas House Bill HB4460

Texas 2019 - 86th Regular

Caption

Relating to certain technical violations of conditions of community supervision.

Impact

This bill significantly impacts the judicial handling of community supervision cases by promoting rehabilitative approaches over punitive ones. By limiting the circumstances that would allow a judge to revoke community supervision, the bill aims to reduce incarceration rates for technical violations, thereby emphasizing rehabilitation. Additionally, it encourages the Texas Department of Criminal Justice to recognize and act upon cost savings derived from maintaining community supervision rather than sending individuals to confinement for minor infractions. Such cost savings can then be allocated to support local departments involved in community supervision.

Summary

House Bill 4460 seeks to address technical violations of community supervision for individuals convicted of nonviolent offenses that fall under state jail felonies or third-degree felonies. The bill introduces Article 42A.7555 to the Code of Criminal Procedure, which establishes specific procedures for judges when handling violations that do not involve new criminal offenses or severe breaches of supervision protocols, such as failing to report for extended periods or contacting victims. The intent of the legislation is to provide more lenient and meaningful responses to minor breaches, allowing judges to modify, continue, or extend community supervision instead of opting for revocation.

Contention

The passage of HB 4460 may elicit discussions surrounding the impact on public safety and the effectiveness of community supervision. Proponents assert that the bill reflects a progressive shift in how the legal system deals with nonviolent offenders, promoting second chances and reducing the strain on correctional resources. Conversely, critics may express concern that this leniency could allow individuals to continue engaging in behaviors that risk public safety, although the bill explicitly excludes serious breaches from this leniency. As communities adapt to these changes in supervision protocol, various stakeholders from legal, social, and law enforcement sectors may engage in debates over optimal practices in supervision and rehabilitation.