Texas Senate Bill SB1658

Texas 2011 - 82nd Regular

• Out of Senate Committee: 5/10/11
• Introduced: 3/11/11
• Voted on by Senate: 5/13/11
• Refer: 3/23/11
• Out of House Committee: 5/21/11
• Report Pass: 5/10/11
• Refer: 5/16/11
• Report Pass: 5/20/11

Caption

Relating to the duties of and investigations conducted by the Texas Forensic Science Commission, the administrative attachment of the Texas Forensic Science Commission to Sam Houston State University, and the accreditation of criminal laboratories by the Department of Public Safety of the State of Texas.

Impact

This legislation has significant impacts on the future of forensic science in Texas, particularly in ensuring that crime laboratories meet stricter accreditation requirements. It outlines the investigative processes that the commission must follow when addressing allegations against laboratories, mandating the preparation of detailed reports on these findings. The establishment of an annual reporting system by the commission will serve to promote transparency and accountability by documenting complaints, investigations, and the overall performance of crime labs in the state.

Summary

SB1658 focuses on the duties and investigative authority of the Texas Forensic Science Commission. The bill makes amendments to the Code of Criminal Procedure related to the accreditation of crime laboratories and outlines the commission's roles in overseeing and investigating forensic practices within the state. One of the primary objectives of the bill is enhancing the integrity and quality of forensic analyses performed in Texas, establishing clearer standards and procedures for addressing claims of professional negligence or misconduct within accredited laboratories.

Contention

While the bill aims to bolster forensic reliability, it is also expected to face scrutiny regarding the limits it places on information disclosure related to investigations into professional misconduct. By establishing an open records limitation, the bill restricts access to specific details during investigations, which raises concerns about accountability and public oversight. Furthermore, the qualifications and appointments of commission members could be debated, especially regarding whether they adequately represent the range of expertise needed to handle complex forensic issues.