Texas 2015 - 84th Regular

Texas Senate Bill SB226 Compare Versions

Only one version of the bill is available at this time.

Old	New	Differences
1	1	By: Ellis S.B. No. 226
2	2
3	3
4	4	A BILL TO BE ENTITLED
5	5	AN ACT
6	6	relating to the applicability of the death penalty to a capital
7	7	offense committed by a person with an intellectual disability.
8	8	BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF TEXAS:
9	9	SECTION 1. Title 1, Code of Criminal Procedure, is amended
10	10	by adding Chapter 46D to read as follows:
11	11	CHAPTER 46D. CAPITAL CASE: EFFECT OF INTELLECTUAL DISABILITY
12	12	Art. 46D.01. DEFINITIONS. In this chapter:
13	13	(1) "Adaptive behavior" means the effectiveness with
14	14	or degree to which a person meets generally recognized standards of
15	15	personal independence and social responsibility by using learned
16	16	conceptual, social, and practical skills in everyday life.
17	17	(2) "Intellectual disability" means significant
18	18	limitations in intellectual functioning that are concurrent with
19	19	significant deficits in adaptive behavior, including conceptual,
20	20	social, and practical skills, if those characteristics originate
21	21	during the developmental period.
22	22	(3) "Person with an intellectual disability" means a
23	23	person with significant limitations in intellectual functioning
24	24	that are concurrent with significant deficits in adaptive behavior,
25	25	including conceptual, social, and practical skills, if those
26	26	characteristics originated during the person's developmental
27	27	period, as determined by a clinician in the exercise of clinical
28	28	judgment.
29	29	(4) "Significant limitations in intellectual
30	30	functioning" refers to a measured intelligence quotient on a
31	31	standardized psychometric instrument of two or more standard
32	32	deviations below the age-group mean for the test used.
33	33	Art. 46D.02. RESTRICTION ON DEATH PENALTY. A defendant who
34	34	is a person with an intellectual disability may not be sentenced to
35	35	death.
36	36	Art. 46D.03. HEARING. (a) Counsel for a defendant in a
37	37	capital case, not later than the 30th day before the trial
38	38	commences, may request that the judge hearing the case hold a
39	39	hearing to determine whether the defendant is a person with an
40	40	intellectual disability.
41	41	(b) If the defendant does not give timely notice as provided
42	42	by Subsection (a), the court may not hold a hearing described by
43	43	this article unless the court finds that good cause existed for
44	44	failure to give timely notice.
45	45	(c) On receipt of a request under Subsection (a), the judge
46	46	shall notify all interested parties of the request. If the judge
47	47	determines that there is evidence to support a finding that the
48	48	defendant is a person with an intellectual disability, a jury shall
49	49	be impaneled to determine that issue. A defendant may waive the
50	50	right to jury determination under this subsection and request that
51	51	the judge make the determination if the court and the prosecuting
52	52	attorney do not object.
53	53	(d) Instructions to the jury submitting the issue of whether
54	54	the defendant is a person with an intellectual disability shall
55	55	require the jury to state its finding on that issue in the verdict.
56	56	(e) If the jury is unable to agree on a unanimous verdict
57	57	after a reasonable opportunity to deliberate, the judge shall
58	58	declare a mistrial, discharge the jury, and impanel another jury to
59	59	determine whether the defendant is a person with an intellectual
60	60	disability.
61	61	(f) At the conclusion of the hearing under this article, the
62	62	judge shall dismiss the jury, and the members of that jury may not
63	63	serve on a jury in the subsequent trial of the case.
64	64	Art. 46D.04. BURDEN OF PROOF. (a) At a hearing under this
65	65	chapter, the burden is on the defendant to prove by a preponderance
66	66	of the evidence that the defendant is a person with an intellectual
67	67	disability.
68	68	(b) A defendant who has an intelligence quotient of 75 or
69	69	less is presumed to be a person with an intellectual disability.
70	70	(c) A determination made by a qualified institution or
71	71	individual, including a psychologist, an educational institution,
72	72	a local mental health and mental retardation authority, the United
73	73	States Social Security Administration, a court, or another
74	74	governmental agency or social service provider that a defendant is
75	75	a person with an intellectual disability, as defined by the law of
76	76	this state or any other state, creates an evidentiary presumption
77	77	that the defendant is a person with an intellectual disability.
78	78	(d) The state may offer evidence to rebut the defendant's
79	79	claim or a presumption under Subsection (b) or (c).
80	80	Art. 46D.05. SENTENCING ALTERNATIVES. (a) If the judge or
81	81	jury, whichever is the finder of fact, determines that the
82	82	defendant is a person with an intellectual disability and the
83	83	defendant is subsequently convicted of the alleged offense, Article
84	84	37.071 does not apply to the defendant, and the judge shall sentence
85	85	the defendant to imprisonment in the Texas Department of Criminal
86	86	Justice for life without parole.
87	87	(b) If the judge or jury, whichever is the finder of fact,
88	88	determines that the defendant is not a person with an intellectual
89	89	disability, the judge shall conduct the trial in the same manner as
90	90	if a hearing under this chapter had not been held. At the trial of
91	91	the offense:
92	92	(1) the jury may not be informed of the fact that the
93	93	judge or a jury has determined under this article that the defendant
94	94	is not a person with an intellectual disability; and
95	95	(2) the defendant may present at trial evidence of
96	96	intellectual disability as permitted by Article 37.071.
97	97	(c) The judge or jury, whichever is the finder of fact,
98	98	must, before the trial of the alleged offense commences, make a
99	99	determination under Subsection (a) or (b).
100	100	Art. 46D.06. APPOINTMENT OF DISINTERESTED EXPERTS. On the
101	101	request of either party or on the judge's own motion, the judge
102	102	shall appoint disinterested experts experienced and qualified in
103	103	the field of diagnosing intellectual disabilities to examine the
104	104	defendant and determine whether the defendant is a person with an
105	105	intellectual disability. The judge may order the defendant to
106	106	submit to an examination by experts appointed under this article.
107	107	Art. 46D.07. INTERLOCUTORY APPEAL. (a) The defendant and
108	108	the state are entitled to appeal a determination described by
109	109	Article 46D.05(b).
110	110	(b) The court of criminal appeals shall adopt rules as
111	111	necessary for the administration of the appeals process established
112	112	by this article.
113	113	(c) An appeal under this article is a direct appeal to the
114	114	court of criminal appeals, and the court of criminal appeals, as
115	115	provided by court rule, shall give priority to the review of an
116	116	appeal under this article over other cases before the court.
117	117	Art. 46D.08. CONSTRUCTION WITH OTHER LAW. If the judge or
118	118	jury, whichever is the finder of fact, determines that the
119	119	defendant is not a person with an intellectual disability and the
120	120	defendant is subsequently convicted of the alleged offense, the
121	121	fact finder's determination:
122	122	(1) does not preclude the defendant from filing a
123	123	motion under Article 46.05; and
124	124	(2) notwithstanding Article 46.05(j), is not
125	125	admissible as evidence in a hearing under Article 46.05.
126	126	SECTION 2. Chapter 6, Penal Code, is amended by adding
127	127	Section 6.05 to read as follows:
128	128	Sec. 6.05. INTELLECTUAL DISABILITY AFFECTING DEATH
129	129	SENTENCE. (a) In this section, "intellectual disability" and
130	130	"person with an intellectual disability" have the meanings assigned
131	131	by Article 46D.01, Code of Criminal Procedure.
132	132	(b) A person with an intellectual disability may not be
133	133	punished by death.
134	134	(c) A person who is sentenced to death at a trial that
135	135	commences before September 1, 2015, may submit to the convicting
136	136	court a motion for a hearing on the issue of whether the person is a
137	137	person with an intellectual disability, to be conducted in the same
138	138	manner as a hearing under Chapter 46D, Code of Criminal Procedure.
139	139	On a finding by the court that documentary evidence supports an
140	140	assertion that the person is a person with an intellectual
141	141	disability, the court may order a hearing that, except for
142	142	occurring after sentencing, is conducted in the same manner as a
143	143	hearing under Chapter 46D, Code of Criminal Procedure. After
144	144	making a finding as to whether the person is a person with an
145	145	intellectual disability, the court shall immediately forward a copy
146	146	of the finding to the court of criminal appeals.
147	147	(d) A finding under this section that the person is not a
148	148	person with an intellectual disability does not preclude the person
149	149	from filing a motion under Article 46.05, Code of Criminal
150	150	Procedure, and is not admissible as evidence in a hearing under that
151	151	article. A finding under Article 46.05 that the person is competent
152	152	to be executed does not preclude the person from filing a motion
153	153	under this section and is not admissible as evidence in a hearing
154	154	under this section.
155	155	SECTION 3. Chapter 46D, Code of Criminal Procedure, as
156	156	added by this Act, applies only to a trial that commences on or
157	157	after the effective date of this Act, regardless of whether the
158	158	alleged offense was committed before, on, or after that date.
159	159	SECTION 4. This Act takes effect September 1, 2015.