HBA-AMW C.S.H.B. 2351 77(R)BILL ANALYSIS


Office of House Bill AnalysisC.S.H.B. 2351
By: Hinojosa
Criminal Jurisprudence
4/18/2001
Committee Report (Substituted)



BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE 

A 1999 drug bust in Tulia, Texas led to the arrest of about 10 percent of
the town's African-American residents based on the testimony of one
undercover officer.  Since the bust, concerns have been raised regarding
the undercover investigation and the handling of the case.  The charges
against one of the defendants arrested in the drug bust have been dismissed
and the undercover officer is under investigation by the United States
Department of Justice.  Current law does not require the testimony of an
undercover officer used to convict a defendant to be corroborated by other
evidence.  C.S.H.B. 2351 provides that a conviction cannot be had on the
testimony of an undercover officer or of a person acting covertly on behalf
of a law enforcement agency or under the color of law enforcement unless
the undercover officer meets certain requirements or there is appropriate
corroborating evidence. 

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

C.S.H.B. 2351 amends the Code of Criminal Procedure to prohibit a defendant
from being convicted of a controlled substance offense on the testimony of
an undercover peace officer or of a person acting covertly on behalf of a
law enforcement agency or under the color of law enforcement unless the
testimony is corroborated by other evidence tending to connect the
defendant with the offense committed and to provide that the corroboration
is not sufficient if the corroboration only shows the commission of the
offense.  The bill authorizes the corroboration to include the testimony of
certain witnesses or the production of evidence of paraphernalia,
fingerprints, audio or video recordings, or an effort to evade arrest.  

The bill does not require the corroboration of the testimony of an
undercover peace officer who has been employed as a full-time peace officer
for at least two years before the undercover operation leading to the
arrest of the defendant, unless the undercover officer is participating in
an undercover operation at or primarily involving the students of a school
or institution of higher education, who holds a peace officer's license
that has not been suspended or revoked at the time of the operation, and
who during the operation complied with guidelines of the officer's agency
or the Commission on Law Enforcement Officer Standards and Education
designed to ensure the reliability of the identification of the defendant
as the person who the officer believes committed the offense.  

EFFECTIVE DATE

September 1, 2001.

COMPARISON OF ORIGINAL TO SUBSTITUTE

C.S.H.B. 2351 modifies the original bill by adding definitions of
"institution of higher education," "peace officer," and "school."  The
substitute differs from the original bill by prohibiting a defendant from
being  convicted of a controlled substance offense on the testimony of an
undercover peace officer or of a person acting covertly on behalf of a law
enforcement agency or under the color of law enforcement unless the
testimony is corroborated by other evidence tending to connect the
defendant with the offense committed rather than a conviction cannot be had
upon the testimony of an undercover law enforcement officer unless
corroborated by other evidence tending to connect the defendant with each
element of the offense committed.   

The substitute modifies the original bill by limiting the offenses to which
the provisions regarding the corroboration of testimony of an undercover
peace officer apply to controlled substance offenses.  The substitute adds
provisions regarding types of corroborative evidence and certain undercover
officers whose testimony does not require corroboration.