Texas Senate Bill SB232

Texas 2011 - 82nd Regular

• Filed: 11/18/10
• Introduced: 11/18/10
• Refer: 1/31/11

Caption

Relating to wearing a secure alcohol monitoring device as a required condition of community supervision for certain intoxication offenses.

Impact

This bill modifies Article 42.12 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure by adding requirements for wearing alcohol monitoring devices. It sets a legal framework within which judges must operate when granting community supervision for certain offenses, ensuring that conditions of supervision are strictly defined and enforced. Importantly, the bill includes provisions for defendants who may have financial constraints, allowing judges to establish payment plans for securing the monitoring device. This feature is intended to balance the imposition of supervision requirements with considerations of defendants' economic situations.

Summary

Senate Bill 232 mandates that individuals convicted of specific intoxication offenses in Texas must wear secure alcohol monitoring devices as a condition of community supervision. The device must monitor the defendant's alcohol consumption continually and cannot be removed for the duration specified by the judge. The legislation aims to ensure compliance with abstinence from alcohol, thereby reinforcing the accountability of individuals under community supervision and aiming to reduce recidivism rates associated with alcohol-related offenses.

Sentiment

The sentiment surrounding SB232 is generally supportive, particularly among lawmakers who advocate for tougher measures regarding alcohol-related offenses. Proponents view the bill as a necessary step towards public safety and helping offenders reintegrate into society with a lower risk of reoffending. However, there are concerns among some parties regarding the implications of the financial burden on defendants and the potential for overreach in enforcing monitoring conditions.

Contention

A notable point of contention revolves around the requirements placed on defendants, particularly regarding the costs associated with monitoring devices. Critics argue that mandating such devices without considering a defendant's ability to pay could lead to unequal treatment under the law. Additionally, there is apprehension that the law may disproportionately affect lower-income individuals, prompting discussions about rehabilitative versus punitive approaches in the justice system.