Texas 2013 - 83rd Regular

Texas House Bill HB3725

Voted on by House
 
Out of Senate Committee
 
Voted on by Senate
 
Governor Action
 
Bill Becomes Law
 

Caption

Relating to the service of a subpoena for the attendance of a law enforcement agency employee.

Impact

By formalizing the procedure for serving subpoenas, HB 3725 aims to not only facilitate smoother interactions between the judicial system and law enforcement but also to minimize delays that might arise from improper service or confusion in compliance. This formalization could enhance the efficiency of legal proceedings involving law enforcement testimony, which is often critical in criminal and civil cases. Furthermore, the bill mandates that law enforcement agencies post relevant contact information about the designated individuals on their websites, increasing transparency and accountability.

Summary

House Bill 3725 addresses the procedural aspects of serving subpoenas for the attendance of employees of law enforcement agencies in Texas. The bill amends various provisions of the Government Code and the Civil Practice and Remedies Code to establish a clear protocol for the service of such subpoenas. It requires law enforcement agencies to designate specific individuals responsible for receiving subpoenas, thereby streamlining the process and ensuring that law enforcement employees are adequately informed of their required appearances in court or other legal settings.

Sentiment

The general sentiment surrounding HB 3725 appears to be positive, with stakeholders recognizing the need for clearer processes in the legal interactions of law enforcement. However, there may still be concerns about the potential for miscommunication or inadequate handling of subpoenas, which could impact the rights of individuals within the judicial process. Overall, the initiative seems to be supported, as it aims to uphold judicial effectiveness while respecting the roles of law enforcement personnel.

Contention

Despite its positive reception, some points of contention may arise regarding the implications of the bill on the autonomy of law enforcement agencies. Critics might argue that centralizing subpoena service responsibilities could lead to bureaucratic processes that could hinder timely responses from law enforcement. However, the overall legislative discussion seems to advocate for the benefits of a structured approach instead of ad hoc practices that could result in inconsistencies and inefficiencies.

Companion Bills

No companion bills found.

Similar Bills

VA SB1010

Subpoenas duces tecum; financial records of nonparty, report.

TX HB2829

Relating to enforcement of certain unclaimed property laws.

NH HB520

Relative to authorizing hearing officers of the department of education to issue subpoenas.

OK HB1563

Criminal procedure; specifying requirements for issuing criminal subpoenas for law enforcement records; codification; effective date.

DE HB6

An Act To Amend Title 29 Of The Delaware Code Relating To The Auditor Of Accounts.

MA H1765

Establishing the uniform interstate depositions and discovery act

VA HB2565

Subpoenas duces tecum; financial records of nonparty, report.

TX SB1823

Relating to the regulation of state banks, state trust companies, and third-party service providers of state banks and state trust companies.