Texas Senate Bill SB383

Texas 2011 - 82nd Regular

• Introduced: 1/20/11
• Refer: 2/2/11

Caption

Relating to the imposition and use of certain court costs for breath alcohol testing programs.

Impact

The legislation modifies existing laws, specifically Article 102.016(b) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, by ensuring that designated fees are collected consistently across various court levels, including district courts, statutory county courts, and county courts. The implications of this change mean that counties may have more resources available to improve and sustain the breath alcohol testing programs, which contribute to public safety efforts aimed at reducing incidents of driving under the influence.

Summary

Senate Bill 383 (SB383) is proposed legislation in Texas that seeks to impose a court cost related to breath alcohol testing programs for individuals convicted of specific alcohol-related offenses. The bill establishes a $45 fee that defendants must pay as part of their court costs upon conviction for violations outlined under several sections of the Penal Code. This fee is intended to support and maintain certified breath alcohol testing programs implemented by municipal or county authorities throughout Texas. SB383 thus formalizes financial responsibilities that can assist in the operational effectiveness of such programs.

Sentiment

General sentiment surrounding SB383 appears to align with a focus on enhancing public safety. Supporters likely view the bill as a necessary step towards better enforcement of alcohol-related laws and increasing accountability among offenders. Although the transcripts did not provide explicit evidence of opposition to the bill, one could infer potential concerns about the financial burden that such fees may impose on defendants, particularly those from lower-income backgrounds.

Contention

Notable points of contention could arise from discussions regarding the effectiveness of the fee in addressing issues related to alcohol consumption and driving offenses. Critics might argue that imposing fees does not directly correlate with deterrence and might disproportionately affect individuals who are already struggling financially. Furthermore, considerations surrounding the management of funds collected from these fees and the transparency of their use could be points of debate in legislative discussions.