Texas House Bill HB2009

Texas 2011 - 82nd Regular

• Out of House Committee: 4/28/11
• Introduced: 3/1/11
• Refer: 3/7/11
• Report Pass: 4/20/11

Caption

Relating to postponement of jury service in certain counties.

Impact

The provisions of HB2009 are intended to streamline the administrative aspects of jury service in counties equipped with a structured judicial framework. By granting the authority to postpone jury duties under specific conditions — such as not having received a postponement since the most recent jury wheel reconstitution — the bill aims to reduce the burden on individuals while ensuring that the jury summons process remains efficient. The legislation outlines clear criteria for granting postponements, which adds an element of predictability for both the courts and potential jurors.

Summary

House Bill 2009 addresses the process for postponing jury service in certain Texas counties, specifically targeting those with a council of judges and a designated jury duty court. The bill introduces procedures that allow individuals summoned for jury duty to request a postponement of their service. This request can be made before the scheduled date by contacting a designated representative of the council, either in person, in writing, or by telephone. The emphasis is on providing flexibility to individuals who may have legitimate reasons for not being able to serve on the initially designated date.

Conclusion

Ultimately, HB2009 seeks to facilitate jury service in a manner that accounts for the individual needs of jurors while balancing the operational requirements of the courts. The implementation of this bill is expected to encourage civic participation in the judicial process, making it more accessible for those who may have previously struggled with rigid scheduling and potential penalties for non-compliance.

Contention

While the bill seems to offer broader opportunities for jurors to reschedule their duties, it may also raise questions regarding the administrative workload on the councils of judges in managing these requests. With the potential for increased requests for postponement, the efficiency of the court's operation could be impacted if not managed correctly. Additionally, concerns could emerge about the fairness and consistency of how postponements are granted across different counties, particularly those that may not uniformly interpret the 'legitimate reasons' for postponement.