Texas House Bill HB1506

Texas 2009 - 81st Regular

• Out of House Committee: 3/30/09
• Voted on by House: 4/28/09
• Out of Senate Committee: 5/21/09
• Voted on by Senate: 5/25/09
• Governor Action: 6/19/09
• Enrolled: 6/1/09
• Passed: 6/19/09

Caption

Relating to the imposition of conditions on certain defendants charged with an offense involving family violence.

Impact

The introduction of this bill aims to provide greater protection for victims of family violence by giving courts the authority to impose stricter conditions on defendants during the pre-trial period. This legislative change is expected to offer a mechanism for monitoring defendants more closely, thereby potentially reducing the risk of further harm to victims. However, the bill specifically states that defendants are responsible for the costs associated with the GPS monitoring system unless they are determined to be indigent, creating discussions about access and equity within the judicial process.

Summary

House Bill 1506 addresses the conditions of release on bond for defendants charged with offenses involving family violence. The bill allows magistrates to impose specific conditions to enhance the safety of victims, such as requiring the defendant to refrain from approaching certain locations related to the victim, such as their residence or workplace. Additionally, it includes provisions for utilizing global positioning monitoring systems (GPS) to track defendants' movements, ensuring they do not violate these restrictions.

Contention

While many support the bill for its potential to enhance victim safety, there are concerns regarding its implementation. Critics argue that the use of GPS systems could raise privacy concerns and that reliance on technology may not fully safeguard against instances of violence. Furthermore, the requirement for defendants to cover the costs of monitoring could disproportionately affect low-income individuals, leading to questions about fairness and the potential for economic discrimination. These issues have sparked debate among legislators and advocacy groups as they consider the balance between protecting victims and ensuring just treatment for defendants.