Texas 2011 - 82nd Regular

Texas House Bill HB690

Filed
 
Out of House Committee
3/17/11  
Introduced
1/18/11  
Voted on by House
4/7/11  
Voted on by Senate
 
Governor Action
 
Bill Becomes Law
 

Caption

Relating to the punishment for the offense of graffiti.

Note

The bill's effective date is set for September 1, 2011, indicating that any offenses occurring after this date would be subjected to the new laws, while earlier offenses would be considered under the old statute.

Impact

The amendments introduced by HB 690 specifically target the penalties for graffiti, aiming to deter vandalism by imposing stricter punishments for those who vandalize significant community and historic properties. As such, this bill aligns with broader efforts to protect community assets and contribute positively to public spaces. Depending on its implementation, this new classification could result in increased prosecutions for graffiti-related offenses, potentially leading to a significant impact on both offenders and local law enforcement resources.

Summary

House Bill 690 aims to amend the existing penalties related to graffiti offenses within the Texas Penal Code. Specifically, it establishes that graffiti marking on certain designated properties, such as schools, places of worship, historic structures, and community centers, could lead to a state jail felony charge if the pecuniary loss incurred is less than $20,000. This change reflects an effort to enhance the seriousness of graffiti offenses, particularly when they affect significant properties that provide public services or hold cultural value.

Contention

While the bill has been generally supported in discussions for strengthening defenses against vandalism of public and culturally important properties, some lawmakers and advocacy groups may raise concerns regarding the implications of felony charges for relatively minor acts of graffiti. This delineation between minor and major offenses may cause debates about proportionality in punishment and the potential for unintended consequences in communities where graffiti might be viewed differently, such as in urban art contexts. The bill's nuances, especially regarding the definition of historic structures, may also be points of contention as stakeholders seek to understand its implications.

Companion Bills

No companion bills found.

Similar Bills

No similar bills found.