Texas Senate Bill SB720

Texas 2019 - 86th Regular

Caption

Relating to eligibility for compensation of persons wrongfully imprisoned.

Impact

The bill's provisions will influence how wrongful imprisonment cases are evaluated in the legal system. It establishes a clear timeline for individuals to file claims, requiring them to submit applications for compensation within three years of receiving a pardon or being granted habeas corpus relief. This timeframe reinforces the demand for timely justice and encourages individuals to pursue their claims promptly. Furthermore, it retroactively allows certain individuals who received pardons prior to 1998 to apply for compensation, reflecting a commitment to ensuring that previous wrongs can be addressed even after many years.

Summary

SB720 seeks to amend the Civil Practice and Remedies Code to address the eligibility for compensation of individuals wrongfully imprisoned in Texas. The bill establishes specific criteria under which a person may be entitled to compensation for wrongful imprisonment. It introduces a new subsection that stipulates that individuals who received compensation for one wrongful conviction are not eligible to receive payment for any concurrent sentence related to another wrongful conviction for which they have already been compensated. This legislative change aims to clarify the compensation process and prevent double compensation for concurrent wrongful imprisonments.

Contention

While the intent of SB720 is to provide a structured approach to compensation for wrongful imprisonment, the stipulation regarding concurrent sentences raises concerns among advocates for criminal justice reform. Critics might argue that these provisions could potentially limit reparations for the wrongly convicted, especially in cases where an individual has suffered multiple wrongful imprisonments. There may be debates surrounding the fairness of not allowing compensation for concurrent sentences, as it may disproportionately affect individuals who have faced systemic injustices across multiple cases. Overall, there is an ongoing discussion about achieving a balance between creating a clear legal framework and ensuring that justice is served.