LEGISLATIVE BUDGET BOARD Austin, Texas FISCAL NOTE, 82ND LEGISLATIVE REGULAR SESSION April 9, 2011 TO: Honorable Pete Gallego, Chair, House Committee on Criminal Jurisprudence FROM: John S O'Brien, Director, Legislative Budget Board IN RE:HB1113 by Raymond (Relating to the sentencing hearing or deferred adjudication hearing and conditions of community supervision for defendants convicted of certain offenses involving controlled substances.), Committee Report 1st House, Substituted No significant fiscal implication to the State is anticipated. The bill would amend the Code of Criminal Procedure to allow a court that handles criminal cases to hold sentencing hearings or deferred adjudication hearings in drug cases at a secondary school under certain conditions. The bill would allow a judge to credit a defendant for hours of community outreach performed under this provision in lieu of hours of community service. To the extent the bill would result in court hearings at secondary schools, which would require the services of a judge, court clerk, court reporter, bailiff, and prosecutor, no significant impact on judicial workloads or fiscal implication to the state is anticipated. The bill would take effect September 1, 2011. Local Government Impact No significant fiscal implication to units of local government is anticipated. The bill would make holding court on school grounds subject to the courts discretion, provided the defendant and school agree. Costs would vary by county related to holding court on school ground, including having deputy on hand to oversee security concerns, temporary set up for court operating, and perhaps travel costs if a hearing would be held at schools that are in different towns than a given court is located. However, because the number of such hearings is within the courts discretion, this analysis assumes local jurisdictions would take the opportunity to hold this type of hearing within existing resources, as appropriate. According to the Texas Education Agency school districts would experience varying and reasonable costs related to the accommodation of hearings, depending on the number and length, if defendants agree to have them conducted at a secondary campus. Source Agencies:212 Office of Court Administration, Texas Judicial Council, 701 Central Education Agency LBB Staff: JOB, TB, ESi, ZS, LXH, KKR
LEGISLATIVE BUDGET BOARD
Austin, Texas
FISCAL NOTE, 82ND LEGISLATIVE REGULAR SESSION
April 9, 2011
TO: Honorable Pete Gallego, Chair, House Committee on Criminal Jurisprudence FROM: John S O'Brien, Director, Legislative Budget Board IN RE:HB1113 by Raymond (Relating to the sentencing hearing or deferred adjudication hearing and conditions of community supervision for defendants convicted of certain offenses involving controlled substances.), Committee Report 1st House, Substituted
TO: Honorable Pete Gallego, Chair, House Committee on Criminal Jurisprudence
FROM: John S O'Brien, Director, Legislative Budget Board
IN RE: HB1113 by Raymond (Relating to the sentencing hearing or deferred adjudication hearing and conditions of community supervision for defendants convicted of certain offenses involving controlled substances.), Committee Report 1st House, Substituted
Honorable Pete Gallego, Chair, House Committee on Criminal Jurisprudence
Honorable Pete Gallego, Chair, House Committee on Criminal Jurisprudence
John S O'Brien, Director, Legislative Budget Board
John S O'Brien, Director, Legislative Budget Board
HB1113 by Raymond (Relating to the sentencing hearing or deferred adjudication hearing and conditions of community supervision for defendants convicted of certain offenses involving controlled substances.), Committee Report 1st House, Substituted
HB1113 by Raymond (Relating to the sentencing hearing or deferred adjudication hearing and conditions of community supervision for defendants convicted of certain offenses involving controlled substances.), Committee Report 1st House, Substituted
No significant fiscal implication to the State is anticipated.
No significant fiscal implication to the State is anticipated.
The bill would amend the Code of Criminal Procedure to allow a court that handles criminal cases to hold sentencing hearings or deferred adjudication hearings in drug cases at a secondary school under certain conditions. The bill would allow a judge to credit a defendant for hours of community outreach performed under this provision in lieu of hours of community service. To the extent the bill would result in court hearings at secondary schools, which would require the services of a judge, court clerk, court reporter, bailiff, and prosecutor, no significant impact on judicial workloads or fiscal implication to the state is anticipated. The bill would take effect September 1, 2011.
Local Government Impact
No significant fiscal implication to units of local government is anticipated. The bill would make holding court on school grounds subject to the courts discretion, provided the defendant and school agree. Costs would vary by county related to holding court on school ground, including having deputy on hand to oversee security concerns, temporary set up for court operating, and perhaps travel costs if a hearing would be held at schools that are in different towns than a given court is located. However, because the number of such hearings is within the courts discretion, this analysis assumes local jurisdictions would take the opportunity to hold this type of hearing within existing resources, as appropriate. According to the Texas Education Agency school districts would experience varying and reasonable costs related to the accommodation of hearings, depending on the number and length, if defendants agree to have them conducted at a secondary campus.
No significant fiscal implication to units of local government is anticipated.
The bill would make holding court on school grounds subject to the courts discretion, provided the defendant and school agree. Costs would vary by county related to holding court on school ground, including having deputy on hand to oversee security concerns, temporary set up for court operating, and perhaps travel costs if a hearing would be held at schools that are in different towns than a given court is located. However, because the number of such hearings is within the courts discretion, this analysis assumes local jurisdictions would take the opportunity to hold this type of hearing within existing resources, as appropriate. According to the Texas Education Agency school districts would experience varying and reasonable costs related to the accommodation of hearings, depending on the number and length, if defendants agree to have them conducted at a secondary campus.
Source Agencies: 212 Office of Court Administration, Texas Judicial Council, 701 Central Education Agency
212 Office of Court Administration, Texas Judicial Council, 701 Central Education Agency
LBB Staff: JOB, TB, ESi, ZS, LXH, KKR
JOB, TB, ESi, ZS, LXH, KKR