Texas House Bill HB211

Texas 2013 - 83rd Regular

• Filed: 11/20/12

Caption

Relating to the amount of the fee paid by a defendant for a peace officer's services in executing or processing an arrest warrant, capias, or capias pro fine.

Impact

The amendments brought about by HB 211 will have a direct impact on the Code of Criminal Procedure, particularly on Article 102.011, which deals with the fees that are to be imposed on defendants. As a result of this bill's passage, defendants convicted of certain offenses will be required to pay higher fees for the processing and execution of warrants. This adjustment could generate additional revenue for local law enforcement agencies, potentially improving their operational capabilities. However, it also raises concerns regarding the financial burden on defendants who may already be dealing with the implications of a criminal conviction.

Summary

House Bill 211 seeks to amend the provisions relating to the amounts charged to defendants for fees associated with peace officer services when executing or processing arrest warrants, capias, or capias pro fine. Specifically, the bill proposes to increase the fee for these services from $50 to $75. This change aims to better reflect the costs associated with such law enforcement activities and to ensure that law enforcement agencies are appropriately compensated for their work. By adjusting these fees, the bill addresses the financial constraints that agencies may face in performing their duties related to arrest warrants.

Sentiment

The sentiment surrounding HB 211 appears to be mixed among legislators and stakeholders. Supporters argue that the fee increase is justified given the costs incurred by law enforcement agencies in executing their duties, advocating for financial viability in policing operations. Conversely, some critics highlight that increased fees for defendants may exacerbate existing inequalities in the criminal justice system, as those with fewer resources could face heightened difficulties in complying with financial penalties associated with their convictions. This central topic of fairness and accessibility remains a point of contention among the discussions surrounding the bill.

Contention

Key points of contention include the implications of raising fees for defendants and whether the increased costs align with the principles of justice and equity in the criminal justice system. While supporters focus on the need for law enforcement agencies to be adequately funded, opponents raise concerns over the potential for financial distress among defendants, particularly those from lower-income backgrounds. Balancing the fiscal needs of law enforcement with the fair treatment of individuals within the justice system constitutes a significant debate as this bill moves forward.