DOCSLIB.ORG

1997 Special Legislative Issue

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
1997 Special Legislative Issue STATE BAR SECTION REPORT VOL. 11, NO. 3 JUVENILE LAW AUGUST 1997 SPECIAL LEGISLATIVE ISSUE OFFICERS Chair: Scott Stevens P.O. Box 727 Belton, Texas 76513 (254) 939-9393 Chair-Elect: Lisa Capers TSPC P.O. Box 13547 Austin, TX 78711 (512) 424-6672 Treasurer: Emily Helm TYC P.O. Box 4260 Austin, Texas 78765 (512) 483-5181 Secretary: Darlene A. Whitten Judge, County Court-At-Law No. 1 210 S. Woodow Lane Denton, Texas 76205 (817) 898-5870 Immediate Past Chair: E. Kent Ellis Judge, 315th District Court 1115 Congress Houston, Texas 77002 (713) 755-6480 COUNCIL Terms Expire 1998 Terms Expire 1999 Barbara Berrera Brownsville Vaughn Bailey Fort Worth Pat Garza San Antonio Robin Sage Longview James Bethke Austin Teana Watson Richmond Terms Expire 2000 Rebecca Erb Belton Kerry Piper Lubbock Carol Weir San Antonio Newsletter Editor: Robert O. Dawson Newsletter Secretary: Debbie Steed University of Texas School of Law University of Texas 727 E. 26th Street School of Law Austin, Texas 78705 (512) 471-1150; Fax: (512) 471-6988 [email protected] Copyright 1997 by Robert O. Dawson on behalf of the Juvenile Law Section. All rights reserved. 2 __________________________________________________________________________________________________ TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Chair's Message ........................................................................................................................ 3 Editor’s Foreword .................................................................................................................... 3 Legislative Appropriations to the Texas Juvenile Probation Commission and Juvenile Probation Issues in the 75th Texas Legislature, Vicki Spriggs-Wright .............. 5 Texas Youth Commission--75th Legislative Session, Steve Robinson ..................................... 9 Texas Department of Protective and Regulatory Services: Funding Related to Juvenile Justice, Thomas Chapmond ............................................................................... 10 Juvenile Justice in the 75th Legislative Session, Robert O. Dawson ..................................... 11 1. Title 3 and Related Provisions ................................................................................... 13 2. Alcohol Violations by Minors .................................................................................... 45 3. Education and Juvenile Justice .................................................................................. 65 4. Sex Offender Legislation ........................................................................................... 87 5. Prosecution of Juveniles in Municipal and Justice Courts ....................................... 103 6. Selected Texas Youth Commission Provisions ....................................................... 110 7. Selected Texas Juvenile Probation Commission Provisions ................................... 117 8. Selected Department of Protective and Regulatory Services Provisions ................. 126 9. Miscellaneous Provisions ......................................................................................... 127 _______________________________________________________________________________________ 3 _________________________________________________________________________________________________ CHAIR'S MESSAGE by Scott K. Stevens I would like to take this opportunity in my first communication to the whole membership of the Juvenile Section to first thank the Honorable Kent Ellis for the fine leadership he exhibited in setting and pursuing high goals for the Juvenile Section. Judge Ellis set goals of expanding membership and moving towards achieving recognition of a specialty in Juvenile Law. We now have the highest membership ever. The last Annual Juve- nile Law Conference had the highest attendance of any to date. As of the June State Bar Convention, the Board of Legal Specialization was considering our request for a recognized specialty and I fully expect that by the next time I write for a newsletter we will have at least a preliminary answer. In keeping with Judge Ellis’s example, I wish to set two major goals. The first is to continue the efforts to establish a recognized specialty in Juvenile Law. Each member of the section needs to contact their Juve- nile Judge or Judges and ask them to write a letter to the Board of Legal Specialization recommending estab- lishment of a recognized specialty. The second goal is a thorough update or even a complete revision of our section bylaws. There are changes being contemplated by the State Bar of Texas in the way the State organization relates to Sections and Committees. One of those changes is to allow Sections to hold their annual business meetings at their own convenience rather than at the State Bar Convention. Since the Juvenile Law Section routinely holds its annual conference in February, this would allow the annual business meeting to occur at the conference and to include many more members in the actual running of the section. There are an number of other changes that are housekeeping changes and updating to include mandatory provisions required by the State Bar that are not currently implemented. As always, we will continue to provide the normal perquisites of membership, including this Legislative Special Issue of the newsletter, and strive to better the practice and practitioners of Juvenile law. Lastly, I would like to thank Professor Robert Dawson, Howard Baldwin, Jim Bethke, Lisa Capers and Neil Nichols, along with all the others who have contributed to the preparation of this issue of the newsletter, for their faithful and tireless efforts at presenting this issue to us in time for our membership to remain the best informed juvenile practitioners in the State. EDITOR'S FOREWORD by Robert O. Dawson Special Legislative Issue. This is only the second Special Legislative Issue of the Juvenile Law Sec- tion Newsletter ever to be published. It contains articles about the 75th legislature, the text of each amendment to juvenile law and commentaries on those amendments. This is a fifth--bonus--issue of the Newsletter for 1997. Our September and December issues will come out as usual. Recognition of the Juvenile Law Section. The June 23, 1997 issue of Texas Lawyer contained a sur- vey of the sections of the State Bar of Texas, ranking them in three categories based on the quantity and quali- ty of their activities. The Juvenile Law Section was one of only nine sections to be ranked in ”Tier 1: Setting the Standard.” Our Section was praised for its Annual Conference and for this Newsletter. The Council and Section members should feel proud. Recognition of Toby Goodman. Once again, Representative Toby Goodman, Chairman of the House Juvenile Justice and Family Issues Committee, proved himself to be the man of the session for juvenile justice. 4 __________________________________________________________________________________________________ By his tireless and intelligent leadership, Representative Goodman once again focused the Texas legislature on juvenile justice legal and financial issues and once again produced positive results on both scores. On June 17, the Texas Probation Association honored Representative Goodman with a special reception and award during the Texas Juvenile Probation Commission’s Post-Legislative Conference in Austin. The recognition is certainly merited. At about the same time, Texas Monthly magazine named Representative Goodman to be one of the ten best legislators of the session. This is a recognition many of us believed he should have also received for his work in the 74th legislature in 1995; certainly, considering his work during both sessions, it would have been unthinkable if he had not been so recognized. Recognition of Neil Nichols. On June 1, at the Texas Corrections Association’ annual conference in El Paso, Neil Nichols was given the Association’s Clarence Stevenson Award. The Award is presented annually to the professional who most exemplifies the traits of fairness, integrity and honor. Neil is General Counsel to the TYC and has long been active in the juvenile field--making substantial contributions to juvenile law and practice. The award is certainly well deserved. Contributors to this Issue. I was fortunate to have assistance from three excellent lawyers in writing the Special Legislative Issue for 1995. I am pleased that Howard Baldwin, Director of Governmental Rela- tions at the Department of Protective and Regulatory Services, Lisa Capers, General Counsel to the Texas Juvenile Probation Commission, and Neil Nichols, General Counsel and Assistant Executive Director for Pro- fessional Services at the Texas Youth Commission have agreed each to do an encore performance. This time, Lisa recruited assistance in her daunting assignment from Wesley Shackelford, Staff Attorney for TJPC, Lin- da Brooke, Director of Education Related Services at TJPC, and Patrick Powers, Legal Assistant at TJPC. In addition to Howard, Lisa and Neil, I was able to recruit Jim Bethke, General Counsel at the Texas Munici- pal Courts Education Center, to write commentaries that particularly affect municipal and justice courts. In addition to those who wrote or contributed to writing the section-by-section commentaries, three per- sons contributed special articles. Vicki Spriggs-Wright, Executive Director of the Texas Juvenile Probation Commission, contributed an article on the legislative appropriation process and its impact on the system. Ste- ve Robinson, Executive Director of the Texas
Load more

Recommended publications
  • SAP Crystal Reports
    Texas PK-16 Public Education Information Resource Texas Public Prekindergarten Programs and Enrollment Ages 3 and 4 Public Prekindergarten Enrollment for 2015-16 School Year Public Prekindergarten Enrollment by Student Instruction Type and ADA Eligibility for 2015-16 School Year 220,640 190,848 (86%) 88,295 (40%) 2015-16 Student Total Students Enrolled Economically Limited English Total Enrolled ADA Eligible Not Eligible for ADA Instruction Ages 3 and 4 Disadvantaged Proficiency Type Students Percent Students Percent Students Percent Enrolled Enrolled Enrolled Enrolled Enrolled Enrolled 8,594 (4%) 6,611 (3%) 5,471 (2%) Age 3 Full-day 12,206 47% 11,616 47% 590 50% Special Education Military Children Homeless Half-day 13,573 53% 12,974 53% 599 50% Total 25,779 100% 24,590 100% 1,189 100% Age 4 Full-day 103,380 53% 96,791 53% 6,589 60% 1,695 (0.8%) 109,816 (50%) 110,824 (50%) Half-day 91,481 47% 87,071 47% 4,410 40% In Foster Care Females Males Total 194,861 100% 183,862 100% 10,999 100% Total Total 220,640 100% 208,452 100% 12,188 100% Public Prekindergarten Enrollment by Ethnicity for 2015-16 School Year Districts Providing Public Districts Providing Public Prekindergarten Prekindergarten for 2015-16 School Year for 2015-16 School Year by Instruction Type 64% 13% Hispanic/Latino Districts 30% White Not Full & Providing Half-day 40% Black or African PK Full-Day American Only Asian Two or more races Districts American Indian or Providing 15% 15% Alaska Nat Half-Day PK Native Hawaiian/Other Only Percentage of Students Enrolled Students of
    [Show full text]
  • Texas Youth Commission (TYC) and Transferred All Functions, Duties and Responsibilities of These Former Agencies to TJJD
    Comprehensive Report Youth Reentry and Reintegration December 1, 2012 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................... 1 OVERVIEW .................................................................................................................................... 1 ASSESSMENTS ............................................................................................................................ 1 PROGRAMS ................................................................................................................................ 2 NETWORK OF TRANSITION PROGRAMS .................................................................................... 5 IDENTIFICATION OF LOCAL PROVIDERS AND TRANSITIONAL SERVICES .................................... 7 Children’s Aftercare Reentry Experience (CARE) ................................................................ 9 Gang Intervention Treatment: Reentry Development for Youth (GitRedy) ....................... 9 SHARING OF INFORMATION .................................................................................................... 10 OUTCOMES ................................................................................................................................. 10 CONCLUSIONS ............................................................................................................................ 14 APPENDICES ..............................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • The Texas Youth Commission
    JOINT SELECT COMMITTEE ON THE OPERATION AND MANAGEMENT OF THE TEXAS YOUTH COMMISSION PRELIMINARY REPORT OF INITIAL FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS A REPORT TO THE LT. GOVERNOR AND THE SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE 80TH TEXAS LEGISLATURE JOHN WHITMIRE JERRY MADDEN SENATE CO-CHAIRMAN HOUSE CO-CHAIRMAN Joint Select Committee on the Operation and Management of the Texas Youth Commission Preliminary Report of Initial Findings and Recommendations Table of Contents I. Executive Summary II. Preliminary Report III. Proclamation IV. Attachment One - Recommended Action Plan by Committee V. Attachment Two - Statistical Breakdown by TDCJ-OIG VI. Attachment Three - Filed Legislation VII. Attachment Four - State Auditor's Report 07-022 VIII. Attachment Five - McLennan County State Juvenile Correctional Facility - Case File Review EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Background The Texas Youth Commission (TYC) is the state agency responsible for the care, custody and rehabilitation of the juvenile offenders who have been committed by the court. The ages of youth committed to TYC ranges from 10 to 17. The TYC can maintain custody of the youth until the age of twenty-one (21). Allegations of mistreatment, disturbances and abuse began to surface and the TYC came under federal scrutiny due to the riot at the Evins Regional Juvenile Center in Edinburg, Texas. The U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Rights Division, began an investigation at the Evins facility in September 2006 and issued their report on March 15, 2007, stating "certain conditions at Evins violate the constitutional rights of the youth". The Senate Criminal Justice Committee, the House Corrections Committee and the Juvenile Justice and Family Issues Committee conducted separate public hearings allowing staff, youth, family members, child advocacy groups, the ACLU and other concerned citizens to be heard.
    [Show full text]
  • Texas Education Agency Overview
    Texas Education Agency Overview 100 - Office of the Commissioner; Senior Policy Advisor The Commissioner's Office provides leadership to schools, manages the Texas Education Agency (TEA), and provides coordination with the state legislature and other branches of state government as well as the U. S. Department of Education. SBOE activities and rules, commissioner rules and regulations, commissioner hearing decisions, coordinates with state legislature, Commissioner’s Correspondence and Complaints Management. Number of FTEs: 6 Correspondence Management Function Description: This function serves to oversee, coordinate, and conduct activities associated with managing and responding to correspondence received by members of the public, local education agencies (LEAs), legislature, and other state agencies. This function operates under the authority of Agency OP 03-01, for which the Office of the Commissioner is the Primary Office of Responsibility (OPR). This function serves as a review and distribution center for correspondence assigned to other offices in coordination with Complaints Management and the Public Information Coordination Office. Complaints Management Function Description: This function serves to oversee, coordinate, and conduct activities associated with managing and responding to complaints received by members of the public. Through various activities, this function ensures that the operations of the Agency’s complaint system is compliant with applicable regulations and policy and effectively meets identified needs of the Agency. This function operates under the authority of Agency OP 04-01, for which the Office of the Commissioner is the Primary Office of Responsibility (OPR). This function mainly serves as a review and distribution center for complaints assigned to other offices in coordination with Correspondence Management and the Public Information Coordination Office.
    [Show full text]
  • Jerry Patterson, Commissioner Texas General Land Office General Land Office Texas STATE AGENCY PROPERTY RECOMMENDED TRANSACTIONS
    STATE AGENCY PROPERTY RECOMMENDED TRANSACTIONS Report to the Governor October 2009 Jerry Patterson, Commissioner Texas General Land Office General Land Office Texas STATE AGENCY PROPERTY RECOMMENDED TRANSACTIONS REPORT TO THE GOVERNOR OCTOBER 2009 TEXAS GENERAL LAND OFFICE JERRY PATTERSON, COMMISSIONER INTRODUCTION SB 1262 Summary Texas Natural Resources Code, Chapter 31, Subchapter E, [Senate Bill 1262, 74th Texas Legislature, 1995] amended two years of previous law related to the reporting and disposition of state agency land. The amendments established a more streamlined process for disposing of unused or underused agency land by defining a reporting and review sequence between the Land Commissioner and the Governor. Under this process, the Asset Management Division of the General Land Office provides the Governor with a list of state agency properties that have been identified as unused or underused and a set of recommended real estate transactions. The Governor has 90 days to approve or disapprove the recommendations, after which time the Land Commissioner is authorized to conduct the approved transactions. The statute freezes the ability of land-owning state agencies to change the use or dispose of properties that have recommended transactions, from the time the list is provided to the Governor to a date two years after the recommendation is approved by the Governor. Agencies have the opportunity to submit to the Governor development plans for the future use of the property within 60 days of the listing date, for the purpose of providing information on which to base a decision regarding the recommendations. The General Land Office may deduct expenses from transaction proceeds.
    [Show full text]
  • Comparison of Colorado, Texas and Missouri Juvenile Rehabilitation
    COMPARISON OF COLODARO TEXAS AND MISSOURI JUVENILE REHABILITATION PROGRAMS SUMMER 2004 Colorado, Texas and Missouri all claim to have exemplary youth correctional facilities in regards to the successful rehabilitation of severe youth offenders. A comparison of the three systems shows that there are similarities between the facilities, but there are also key differences. These key differences help define the different programs from each other, as well as their performance and success rates. This report looks at how the facilities operate, the operating costs, how the youth get placed there, who the youth typically are, and the recidivism rates of the different programs in comparison to the costs. FACILITIES AND OPERATIONS] To understand the difference in performance among the three states one must understand the different ways the state facilities operate. One of the main differences between the three states’ programs, deals with the specific department jurisdiction of the rehabilitation program. COLORADO YOUTH OFFENDER SERVICES In Colorado the YOS program is operated by the adult correctional commission know as the Colorado Department of Corrections. The YOS program is only open to those youth who are adjudicated as adults and then meet the offense standards. Currently if a juvenile commits a class one felony or specific class two felonies, they are not eligible for the Colorado YOS program, and carry out their sentence in the adult prison system. Kids who do enter the YOS system go through 4 phases. First, offenders are admitted to the IDO or the Intake, Diagnostic and Orientation Program where they spend the first 30 days learning how the entire program works, and developing certain behavioral skills similar to a basic training regiment of the armed services.
    [Show full text]
  • Juveniles in the Adult Criminal Justice System in Texas
    JuvenilesJuveniles inin thethe AdultAdult CriminalCriminal JusticeJustice SystemSystem inin TexasTexas by Michele Deitch Special Project Report Lyndon B. Johnson School of Public Affairs The University of Texas at Austin Juveniles in the Adult Criminal Justice System in Texas By Project Director Michele Deitch, J.D., M.Sc., Senior Lecturer LBJ School of Public Affairs Student Participants Emily Ling, LBJ School of Public Affairs Emma Quintero, University of Texas School of Law Suggested citation for this report: Michele Deitch (2011). Juveniles in the Adult Criminal Justice System in Texas, Austin, TX: The University of Texas at Austin, LBJ School of Public Affairs A Special Project Report from the Lyndon B. Johnson School of Public Affairs The University of Texas at Austin Applied Research in Juvenile and Criminal Justice—Fall Semester 2010 March 2011 © 2011 by The University of Texas at Austin All rights reserved. Cover design by Doug Marshall, LBJ School Communications Office Cover photo by Steve Liss/The AmericanPoverty.org Campaign TABLE OF CONTENTS List of Tables and Figures v Acknowledgements vii Executive Summary x Part I: Introduction 1 A. Purpose of Report 1 B. Methodology 2 C. Structure of Report 2 Part II: Overview 3 A. Historical Background 3 B. Sentencing and Transfer Options for Serious Juvenile Offenders Under Texas Law 4 C. Problems with Confining Juveniles in Adult Prisons and Jails 6 Part III: Findings 9 A. Numbers of adult certification cases vs. juvenile determinate sentencing 9 B. Characteristics of certified and determinate sentence populations 10 (1) Demographics 10 Age 10 Gender 11 Ethnicity 12 County of Conviction 12 (2) Criminal Offense 13 (3) Criminal History 16 Prior Referrals to Juvenile Court 17 Prior Referrals to Juvenile Court for Violent Offenses 17 Prior TYC Commitments 18 C.
    [Show full text]
  • Summary of Legislative Budget Board Reports
    LEGISLATIVELEGISLATIVE BBUDGETUDGET BBOARDOARD Executive Summary of Legislative Budget Board Reports SUBMITTED TO THE 84TH TEXAS LEGISLATURE PREPARED BY LEGISLATIVE BUDGET BOARD STAFF JANUARY 2015 Executive Summary of Legislative Budget Board Reports SUBMITTED TO THE 84TH TEXAS LEGISLATURE JANUARY 2015 LEGISLATIVE BUDGET BOARD STAFF CONTENTS CROSS FUNCTION GOVERNMENT EFFECTIVENESS AND EFFICIENCY Improve Data Collection and Reform State Truancy Laws to Enhance the Quality of Truancy Interventions ................. 1 Increase Transparency of Discretionary Transfers from the School Land Board’s Real Estate Special Fund ...................... 3 OTHER REPORTS Overview of Impacts of Hydraulic Fracturing in Texas, Legislative Primer ...................................................................... 4 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND REGULATION GOVERNMENT EFFECTIVENESS AND EFFICIENCY Modify the Texas Medical Liability Joint Underwriting Association ............................................................................... 5 Modify the Insurance Guaranty Model to Better Align Market Incentives and Prevent the Loss of Future State Revenue ............................................................................................................................................................. 6 Strengthen Enforcement of the Amusement Ride Program to Improve Compliance ...................................................... 7 Defi ne and Establish Penalties for Worker Misclassifi cation ...........................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Legislative Hearing 2 on 3 4 June 26, 2003 5
    Redistricting Subcommittee Hearing in Lubbock Witness: - June 26, 2003 Page 1 1 LEGISLATIVE HEARING 2 ON 3 4 JUNE 26, 2003 5 ----------------------------------------------------------- 6 A P P E A R A N C E S 7 REPRESENTATIVE CARL ISETT 8 REPRESENTATIVE KENNY MARCHANT 9 REPRESENTATIVE KENT GRUSENDORF 10 ----------------------------------------------------------- 11 LEGISLATIVE PUBLIC HEARING ON CONGRESSIONAL REDISTRICTING PLAN TAKEN BEFORE LINDI REEVES, CERTIFIED 12 SHORTHAND REPORTER AND NOTARY PUBLIC IN AND FOR THE STATE OF TEXAS, AT 9:00 A.M., ON THE 26TH DAY OF JUNE, 2003. 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Hoffman Reporting & Video Service www.hoffmanreporting.com Redistricting Subcommittee Hearing in Lubbock Witness: - June 26, 2003 Page 2 1 REPRESENTATIVE MARCHANT: WHILE WE'RE 2 BEGINNING TO START THIS MORNING, LET ME GIVE YOU A LITTLE 3 INFORMATION. OUT ON THE FRONT DESK ARE SOME MAPS. WHAT IS 4 OUT FRONT ARE TWO MAPS. ONE OF THEM IS A MAP OF THE 5 CURRENT DISTRICTS AS THEY ARE NOW, AS ORDERED BY THE COURT, 6 AND THEN THERE IS ANOTHER MAP WHICH IS THE MAP THAT WAS 7 VOTED OUT OF THE HOUSE, THE REDISTRICTING COMMITTEE BACK IN 8 THE REGULAR SESSION. THOSE ARE THE TWO MAPS WE FEEL LIKE 9 ARE THE MOST IMPORTANT MAPS TO BE BROUGHT TODAY. 10 THERE ARE MANY, MANY MORE MAPS AVAILABLE ON THE 11 REDISTRICTING ON THE INTERNET, AND MANY OF YOU -- IF YOU 12 ARE INTERESTED IN THAT INFORMATION THE CLERKS WILL BE ABLE 13 TO TELL YOU, AND IT'S OUT FRONT, INFORMATION ON HOW TO GET 14 ON THE INTERNET AND GET INTO THOSE PROGRAMS, IT'S OUT AT 15 THE FRONT DESK.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 10. Texas Dispositional Alternatives Danny Pirtile Introduction Juvenile Judges and District Attorneys Play an Important
    Chapter 10. Texas Dispositional Alternatives Danny Pirtile Introduction Juvenile judges and district attorneys play an important role in determining appropriate and often-necessary sanctions for those youth deemed delinquent and incorrigible. In the late 1980s, there was a transitional period for the juvenile justice system, where state legislatures began to institute policies aimed at violent, serious, and chronic juvenile offenders (Snyder & Sickmund, 1995; TJPC, 2003). Texas was not immune to the dramatic policy shifts being initiated during the late 1980s and early 1990s that was due to an overwhelming increase in juvenile crime and public fear of habitual and violent youthful offenders. Cox, Conrad, Allen and Hanser (2007) present a plethora of programs and dispositional choices available to juvenile justice officials. This chapter presents dispositional programs available to Texas juvenile officials and the milieu of these dispositions. Texas lawmakers developed policies that sought to decrease the non-adversarial nature of the juvenile court and replace them with increased procedural similarities to the adult criminal justice system. These legislative changes resulted in the creation of laws that significantly altered dispositions or adjudicatory outcomes in the juvenile justice system. Juvenile judges and prosecutors received increased authority and were provided with a wide range of dispositional alternatives which included placing a youth on probation to transferring the case to the adult system. Thus, the new goal was to focus more on providing tougher, offense based sanctions, while still retaining some of the safeguards provided in the juvenile justice system, which ultimately rely on the parens patriae doctrine of rehabilitation and focus on the best interests of the child.
    [Show full text]
  • Juvenile Justice Reform in Texas: the Onc Text, Content & Consequences of Senate Bill 1630 Sara A
    Journal of Legislation Volume 42 | Issue 2 Article 5 5-27-2016 Juvenile Justice Reform in Texas: The onC text, Content & Consequences of Senate Bill 1630 Sara A. Gordon Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarship.law.nd.edu/jleg Part of the Criminal Law Commons, Criminal Procedure Commons, Family Law Commons, Human Rights Law Commons, Juvenile Law Commons, and the Legislation Commons Recommended Citation Sara A. Gordon, Juvenile Justice Reform in Texas: The Context, Content & Consequences of Senate Bill 1630, 42 J. Legis. 232 (2016). Available at: http://scholarship.law.nd.edu/jleg/vol42/iss2/5 This Note is brought to you for free and open access by the Journal of Legislation at NDLScholarship. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal of Legislation by an authorized administrator of NDLScholarship. For more information, please contact [email protected]. JUVENILE JUSTICE REFORM IN TEXAS: THE CONTEXT, CONTENT & CONSEQUENCES OF SENATE BILL 1630 Sara A. Gordon* INTRODUCTION In 2003, Jimmy Martinez, a resident of San Antonio, entered the Texas criminal justice system after missing his school bus.1 Charged with truancy and destruction of property, Jimmy was sent to live in a county juvenile detention center for six months.2 Five months into his sentence, he was transferred to a secure state facility four hun- dred miles from his home and managed by the Texas Youth Commission (hereinafter TYC) (now the Texas Juvenile Justice Department).3 While a prisoner of that facil- ity, Jimmy witnessed his best friend’s murder and was regularly
    [Show full text]
  • Congressional Record United States Th of America PROCEEDINGS and DEBATES of the 108 CONGRESS, SECOND SESSION
    E PL UR UM IB N U U S Congressional Record United States th of America PROCEEDINGS AND DEBATES OF THE 108 CONGRESS, SECOND SESSION Vol. 150 WASHINGTON, THURSDAY, APRIL 1, 2004 No. 44—Part II House of Representatives TRANSPORTATION EQUITY ACT: A Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance want to change the policy with this LEGACY FOR USERS—Continued of my time. new legislation. So this was not to b 1545 Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Chair- side-step the courts but, rather, to man, I yield myself such time as I may keep the law the same. Now, undoubtedly, supersized trucks consume. Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Chair- mean growing safety risks for highway I will say, though, I am usually in man, reclaiming my time, but the in- drivers and pedestrians on narrow favor of what occurs by State action, dustry or the plaintiff that filed the roads. According to the U.S. Depart- but what this amendment does, it al- suit is now being precluded from going ment of Transportation, an estimated lows the State of New Jersey to limit forth. If my colleague wants to do that, 5,000 Americans die each year in acci- large trucks and twin-trailer combina- have the court or New Jersey file an in- dents involving large trucks, and an tion trucks to the interstate system, junction against the court’s decision. additional 130,000 drivers and pas- not intrastate, the New Jersey Turn- Do not ask us to undo what a court has sengers are injured. New Jersey has a pike and the Atlantic City Expressway, ruled.
    [Show full text]