Texas Senate Bill SB1710

Texas 2009 - 81st Regular

• Out of Senate Committee: 4/14/09
• Voted on by Senate: 4/23/09
• Out of House Committee: 5/13/09

Caption

Relating to the creation of independent assigned counsel programs.

Impact

The enactment of SB1710 is expected to significantly influence the legal landscape concerning indigent defense in Texas. By formalizing the role of independent assigned counsel programs, the bill seeks to improve the quality of legal defense available to individuals unable to afford counsel. It sets forth provisions for the establishment of these programs by court judges and allows for better organization and oversight of legal services provided to indigent defendants. Moreover, it mandates that appointed counsel meet specified qualifications and adhere to performance standards designed to enhance the efficacy of defense services.

Summary

SB1710 aims to establish independent assigned counsel programs in Texas as a reform measure to provide legal representation for indigent defendants in criminal cases. The bill amends various sections of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure to outline the structure, funding, and administration of these independent programs, ensuring that attorneys are fairly appointed and compensated. This legislation seeks to ensure compliance with state law while providing a more equitable process for appointing legal counsel in misdemeanor and felony cases.

Contention

While the bill is largely seen as a step forward for indigent defense, discussions around SB1710 may spotlight issues related to funding and resource allocation. Critics may raise concerns about the adequacy of financial support for these independent programs, as funding will stem from county resources. Furthermore, the legislation's potential to create administrative burdens on local courts might be contested, as the directive for new systems and oversight can lead to complications in implementation. Thus, the balance between enhancing legal representation and managing costs will likely shape the debate surrounding SB1710.