Texas 2013 83rd Regular

Texas House Bill HB1282 House Committee Report / Analysis

Filed 02/01/2025

Download
.pdf .doc .html
                    BILL ANALYSIS             H.B. 1282     By: Turner, Sylvester     Judiciary & Civil Jurisprudence     Committee Report (Unamended)             BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE    There is concern that a provision of law regarding the inspection of certain records and files relating to a child's juvenile justice proceeding is being interpreted differently throughout the state. For example, interested parties note that some counties allow the defense attorney of a child who is a party to such a proceeding to make copies of offense reports in the district attorney's case file, while other counties claim that state law prevents the district attorney's office from allowing such copies to be made. H.B. 1282 seeks to clarify this issue.       RULEMAKING AUTHORITY    It is the committee's opinion that this bill does not expressly grant any additional rulemaking authority to a state officer, department, agency, or institution.       ANALYSIS    H.B. 1282 amends the Family Code to authorize certain individuals or entities associated with a child's juvenile justice proceeding to copy, in addition to inspect, the records and files of a juvenile court, a clerk of court, a juvenile probation department, or a prosecuting attorney relating to the child.       EFFECTIVE DATE    On passage, or, if the bill does not receive the necessary vote, September 1, 2013.        

BILL ANALYSIS

# BILL ANALYSIS

 

 

 

H.B. 1282
By: Turner, Sylvester
Judiciary & Civil Jurisprudence
Committee Report (Unamended)

H.B. 1282

By: Turner, Sylvester

Judiciary & Civil Jurisprudence

Committee Report (Unamended)

 

 

 

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE    There is concern that a provision of law regarding the inspection of certain records and files relating to a child's juvenile justice proceeding is being interpreted differently throughout the state. For example, interested parties note that some counties allow the defense attorney of a child who is a party to such a proceeding to make copies of offense reports in the district attorney's case file, while other counties claim that state law prevents the district attorney's office from allowing such copies to be made. H.B. 1282 seeks to clarify this issue.
RULEMAKING AUTHORITY    It is the committee's opinion that this bill does not expressly grant any additional rulemaking authority to a state officer, department, agency, or institution.
ANALYSIS    H.B. 1282 amends the Family Code to authorize certain individuals or entities associated with a child's juvenile justice proceeding to copy, in addition to inspect, the records and files of a juvenile court, a clerk of court, a juvenile probation department, or a prosecuting attorney relating to the child.
EFFECTIVE DATE    On passage, or, if the bill does not receive the necessary vote, September 1, 2013.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE 

 

There is concern that a provision of law regarding the inspection of certain records and files relating to a child's juvenile justice proceeding is being interpreted differently throughout the state. For example, interested parties note that some counties allow the defense attorney of a child who is a party to such a proceeding to make copies of offense reports in the district attorney's case file, while other counties claim that state law prevents the district attorney's office from allowing such copies to be made. H.B. 1282 seeks to clarify this issue.

 

RULEMAKING AUTHORITY 

 

It is the committee's opinion that this bill does not expressly grant any additional rulemaking authority to a state officer, department, agency, or institution.

 

ANALYSIS 

 

H.B. 1282 amends the Family Code to authorize certain individuals or entities associated with a child's juvenile justice proceeding to copy, in addition to inspect, the records and files of a juvenile court, a clerk of court, a juvenile probation department, or a prosecuting attorney relating to the child.

 

EFFECTIVE DATE 

 

On passage, or, if the bill does not receive the necessary vote, September 1, 2013.