HBA-SEP, EDN H.B. 1464 77(R)    BILL ANALYSIS


Office of House Bill AnalysisH.B. 1464
By: Dunnam
Criminal Jurisprudence
3/12/2001
Introduced



BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE 

Current law, in response to the United States Supreme Court decision of
Batson v. Kentucky, prohibits the use of peremptory challenges on the basis
of race but does not extend the prohibition to include gender or religion.
Including gender would make state law consistent with the decisions of the
Court of Criminal Appeals case of Fritz v. State and J.E.B. v. Alabama
which prohibit the discriminatory use of peremptory challenges on the basis
of gender.  The Court of Criminal Appeals, in Casarez v. State, decided not
to extend Batson to include religion and the Supreme Court has not
addressed the use of religion as a peremptory challenge.  However,
residents of Texas should not be denied the opportunity to serve on a jury
solely because of the person's religious affiliation unless there is some
showing that an individual's religious belief(s) would prevent the
individual from being a fair and impartial juror in the case actually being
tried.  House Bill 1464 prohibits the exercise of peremptory challenges in
a criminal case to exclude a person from a jury on the basis of the
person's gender or religion.  

RULEMAKING AUTHORITY

It is the opinion of the Office of House Bill Analysis that this bill does
not expressly delegate any additional rulemaking authority to a state
officer, department, agency, or institution. 

ANALYSIS

House Bill 1464 amends the Code of Criminal Procedure to require the court
in a criminal case to grant a defendant's motion to dismiss the array if
the defendant alleges and the court determines that the attorney
representing the state exercised peremptory challenges to exclude persons
from the jury on the basis of gender or religion, and the defendant has
offered evidence to support the allegation.  If the defendant establishes a
prima facie case, the burden shifts to the attorney representing the state
to give an explanation for the challenges that is neutral with respect to
gender or religion.  A court is required to call a new array in a case if
the court determines that the attorney representing the state challenged
prospective jurors on the basis of gender or religion. 

EFFECTIVE DATE

September 1, 2001.