Texas House Bill HB558

Texas 2009 - 81st Regular

• Out of House Committee: 4/6/09
• Voted on by House: 4/15/09
• Out of Senate Committee: 5/14/09
• Voted on by Senate: 5/21/09
• Governor Action: 6/19/09
• Enrolled: 5/23/09
• Passed: 6/19/09

Caption

Relating to law enforcement and judicial procedures for, and the prosecution of, children who engage in conduct constituting public intoxication.

Summary

House Bill 558 proposes significant amendments to the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure and the Penal Code specifically regarding how law enforcement and judicial systems handle cases of public intoxication involving children. The bill allows peace officers the discretion to release a child who commits public intoxication instead of taking them into custody, provided they can release the child to a responsible adult. This reflects a shift towards a more rehabilitative approach rather than punitive actions against minors, emphasizing the need for parental responsibility in managing such situations. The proposed amendments to Article 14.031 further empower law enforcement to issue field release citations instead of arresting a child for public intoxication. The conditions surrounding this are critical: the child must be released to a parent or authorized adult, thereby preventing unnecessary detention and fostering family involvement in the child's conduct. By updating these laws, HB558 aims to mitigate the adverse effects of juvenile arrests, especially for non-violent offenses like public intoxication. Impacting state laws significantly, this bill modifies the landscape of juvenile justice in Texas by creating opportunities for diversion from the juvenile detention system. These changes could lead to reduced interaction with the legal system at a young age, aiming to eliminate the long-term consequences that can arise from a juvenile's criminal record. It addresses specific processing procedures for minors which may empower families while establishing accountability for minor offenses. However, the bill also raises points of contention regarding its implementation, particularly around the potential variability in enforcement by police officers, who hold significant discretion under this proposal. Critics may argue that such discretion could lead to unequal treatment among children in similar situations or that releasing minors to adults does not guarantee their safety or proper counseling. A balance must be struck to ensure that public safety and juvenile rehabilitation coexist effectively.