Presentation Outline: Juvenile Records Catherine Klier Administration Manager, City of Houston Municipal Courts Department Course Objectives By the end of this session, participants will be able to: 1. Distinguish between confidential and public records; 2. Compare the changes made by the 83rd Legislature regarding confidentiality of juvenile records; 3. Summarize additional aspects of juvenile record confidentiality, including expunction, dissemination authority, and information sharing between governmental entities; and 4. List six persons/entities that have access to confidential juvenile records. I. Confidential and Public Records Juvenile Confidentiality- 2009-2011 Public Records o Texas Public Information Act Chapter 552, Government Code o Texas Rules of Judicial Administration Rule 12 Confidential Records o Chapter 58, Texas Family Code o Recent additions- Articles 44.2811 & 45.0217, Texas Code of Criminal Procedure Types of Records- Municipal/Justice/Juvenile Courts o Criminal records- Municipal/Justice Courts o Juvenile record- Juvenile Court o Record formats II. Legislative Changes (Courtesy of the 83 rd Legislature) SB 393 - Expanded “conditional” confidentiality o Effective September 1 st o Offers confidentiality for juvenile defendants who satisfy the components of deferred disposition. HB 528 - Absolute confidentiality o Effective January 1 st o Records in municipal/justice courts are confidential from the time of charging. SB 393 v. HB 528- Issues facing Municipal/Justice Courts Request for Opinion- Texas Office of the Attorney General III. Expunction, Dissemination Authority, and Interagency Sharing of Records Expunction- Open court notification of right to expunge records required. o Code of Criminal Procedure- Art. 45.055 Pertains to Failure to Attend School o Code of Criminal Procedure- Art. 45.0216 Penal Code Offenses- §8.07(a)(4) or (5) Dissemination Authority- criminal record history o Chapter 411- Government Code Interagency Sharing of Records o §58.0051, Family Code- Interagency sharing of educational records o §58.0052, Family Code- Interagency sharing of non-educational records IV. Entities with Access to Confidential Juvenile Records Article 45.0217(b), Code of Criminal Procedure
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
Presentation Outline: Juvenile Records Catherine Klier
Administration Manager, City of Houston Municipal Courts Department
Course Objectives
By the end of this session, participants will be able to:
1. Distinguish between confidential and public records;
2. Compare the changes made by the 83rd Legislature regarding confidentiality of juvenile records;
3. Summarize additional aspects of juvenile record confidentiality, including expunction, dissemination authority, and
information sharing between governmental entities; and
4. List six persons/entities that have access to confidential juvenile records.
I. Confidential and Public Records
� Juvenile Confidentiality- 2009-2011
� Public Records
o Texas Public Information Act
� Chapter 552, Government Code
o Texas Rules of Judicial Administration
� Rule 12
� Confidential Records
o Chapter 58, Texas Family Code
o Recent additions- Articles 44.2811 & 45.0217, Texas Code of Criminal Procedure
� Types of Records- Municipal/Justice/Juvenile Courts
o Criminal records- Municipal/Justice Courts
o Juvenile record- Juvenile Court
o Record formats
II. Legislative Changes (Courtesy of the 83rd
Legislature)
� SB 393- Expanded “conditional” confidentiality
o Effective September 1st
o Offers confidentiality for juvenile defendants who satisfy the components of deferred disposition.
� HB 528- Absolute confidentiality
o Effective January 1st
o Records in municipal/justice courts are confidential from the time of charging.
� SB 393 v. HB 528- Issues facing Municipal/Justice Courts
� Request for Opinion- Texas Office of the Attorney General
III. Expunction, Dissemination Authority, and Interagency Sharing of Records
� Expunction- Open court notification of right to expunge records required.
o Code of Criminal Procedure- Art. 45.055
� Pertains to Failure to Attend School
o Code of Criminal Procedure- Art. 45.0216
� Penal Code Offenses- §8.07(a)(4) or (5)
� Dissemination Authority- criminal record history
o Chapter 411- Government Code
� Interagency Sharing of Records
o §58.0051, Family Code- Interagency sharing of educational records
o §58.0052, Family Code- Interagency sharing of non-educational records
IV. Entities with Access to Confidential Juvenile Records
� Article 45.0217(b), Code of Criminal Procedure
Juvenile Records: Defining a New Path for Criminal Courts
2
3
4
Distinguish between confidential and public records;1
Compare the changes made by the 83rd Legislature regarding the confidentiality of records;
List six persons/entities that have access to confidential records of juvenile defendants.
Summarize additional aspects of record confidentiality for juveniles and;
Art. 45.0217, Code of Criminal Procedure: Added 2011‐ 82nd Legislature Article also includes law enforcement records. Exceptions: Art. 15.27, 45.0217(b)
Juvenile Confidentiality
• Municipal/Justice Courts‐Criminal Records
Not all records concerning juveniles are “juvenilerecords”:
Types of Records
• Juvenile Courts‐ Juvenile Records
83rd Legislative Session
Amends §44.2811 and §45.0217 CCP
“Expanded” Conditionalconfidentiality of juvenile records.
Expands juvenile confidentiality to include cases dismissed after successful completion of deferred disposition.
Effective September 1, 2013.
SB 393
Amends §44.281, §45.0217 CCP, §58.00711 FC
Absolute confidentiality of juvenile records (non‐traffic, class C misdemeanors).
All records are confidential from the charging of the juvenile, regardless of satisfaction of the conditions of judgment.
Effective January 1, 2014.
HB 528
SB 393 v. HB 528
The Office of Court Administration submitted an RQ with the Attorney General’s Office to determine if SB 393 and HB 528 can be reconciled.
RQ‐1136‐GA‐ Decision made: January 2, 2014!
Four questionswere asked by the OCA.
GA‐1035‐ decision from AG’s Office.
AG’s goals:
“Ascertain and give effect to the Legislature’s intent.”
Create harmonization between statutes, if possible.
AG Opinion
Question 1: Does HB 528 irreconcilably conflict with SB 393/SB 394?
Answer: Irreconcilable conflicts arise when it is “impossible to comply with both provisions at the same time.”
It was found that a court can comply with “simultaneously” with the amendments of the Senate Bills and House Bill, as it relates to Art. 44.2811, 45.0217, CCP and Sec. 58.00711 FC, so there is no irreconcilable conflict.
AG Opinion SB 393/HB 528 ‐ Dissected
Question 2: If there were an irreconcilable conflict, would SB 393 control over HB 528?
Answer: Since there is no irreconcilable conflict, the Attorney General’s office did not answer this question.
AG Opinion SB 393/HB 528‐ Dissected
Question 3: Assuming no irreconcilable conflict, with SB 393/394 in effect September 1, 2013 and HB 528 in effect January 1, 2014, will HB 528 “supplant the provisions” of SB 393/394?
Answer: No. Each statute is effective on January 1, 2014 since the statutes do not conflict.
AG Opinion SB 393/HB 528‐ Dissected
Question 4a: Assuming no irreconcilable conflict, should proceedings involving children with non‐traffic, fine‐only cases be closed to the public?
Answer: No. The Senate Bills and House Bill do not require such action.
Art. 1.24, CCP‐ “[t]he proceedings and trials in all courts shall be public.”
Art. 45.041(d), CCP‐ “All judgments, sentences and final orders of the…judge shall be rendered in open court.”
AG Opinion SB 393/HB 528‐ Dissected
Question 4b: Assuming no irreconcilable conflict, can court dockets be publicly disclosed?
Answer: Yes. “Schedule” dockets are considered an “administrative instrument” of the court and provide the public with knowledge of pending hearings and proceedings. These dockets are not considered a “record” or “file” subject to confidentiality.
AG Opinion SB 393/HB 528‐ Dissected
Municipal and JP Courts are required to keep all criminal records, files, and information on juvenile non‐traffic, fine‐only cases confidential from the public from the time the juvenile is charged with the offense.
Dockets utilized for the purpose of scheduling are able to be posted in public view.
Proceedings on juvenile cases can be open to the public.
The AG’s opinion provides clarity on legislative intent. Courts must apply their own judgment and interpretation as to how the changes in law are to be applied.
Takeaways from the AG’s Opinion
3rd Parties and HB 528 It was not the intent of the legislature to affect the
Court’s normal business operations.
What about…
Collection companies
Community service agencies
Teen court agencies
Bondsmen
Simple solution: Institute a “release of information”
Expunction of certain conviction records:
Art. 45.0216(e) “The judge shall inform the person and any parent in
open court of the person’s expunction rights…”
Art. 45.0216(f) “The court shall order the conviction, together with
all complaints, verdicts, sentences, and prosecutorial and law enforcement records…expunged from the person’s record…”
Expunctions‐ Code of Criminal Procedure
Expunction of conviction and records in Failure to Attend School Cases:
Art. 45.055(c) “[T]he court shall order the conviction, together
with all complaints, verdicts, sentences, and other documents relating to the offense…to be expunged from the applicant’s record.”
Expunctions‐ Code of Criminal Procedure
Dissemination of criminal history record information:
§411.081, Government Code
This subchapter does not apply to criminal record history that is:
§411.081(a)(3)‐ public, judicial, administrative, or legislative proceedings;
411.081(a)(4)‐ court records of public judicial proceedings.
Dissemination Authority
Interagency sharing of educational records:
§58.0051, Family Code
§58.0051(2)(I)‐ “[A] court with jurisdiction over juveniles” is considered a “juvenile service provider” under this statute.
§58.0051(f)‐ juvenile service providers can share confidential educational information with other juvenile service providers.
§58.0051(g)‐ records provided to a juvenile service provider under this statute remain confidential.
Interagency Sharing of Records
Interagency sharing of non‐educational records:
§58.0052, Family Code
58.0052(a)(1)‐ “juvenile service provider” has the same meaning as 58.0051
§58.0052(e)‐ juvenile service providers can share confidential educational information with other juvenile service providers.
§58.0052(f)‐ records provided to a juvenile service provider under this statute remain confidential.
Interagency Sharing of Records
Entities With Access to Confidential Records
Open inspection of confidential records related to the conviction of a child:Art. 45.0217(b), Code of Criminal Procedure
Confidential juvenile court information may be open to inspection by:
Judges or court staff;
A criminal justice agency for a criminal justice purpose;
� Expands juvenile confidentiality to include cases dismissed after
successfulsuccessful completion of deferred disposition.
� Effective September 1, 2013September 1, 2013.
�� HB 528HB 528
� Amends §44.281, §45.0217 CCP, §58.00711 FC
�� AbsoluteAbsolute confidentiality of juvenile records (non-traffic, class C misdemeanors).
�� AllAll records are confidential from the charging of the juvenile, regardless of satisfaction of the conditions of judgment.
� Effective January 1, 2014January 1, 2014.
JUVENILE CONFIDENTIALITYJUVENILE CONFIDENTIALITY
-- Issues Facing Municipal CourtsIssues Facing Municipal Courts
�� SB 393SB 393
� Cases that are dismissed are not confidential if the case was never adjudicated.
� Records are not confidential at the time of the charge, or while the case is in a pending/open status or delinquent.
�� HB 528HB 528
� Problematic for required posting of dockets.
� Can these cases be heard in open court due to the confidentiality requirements?
� Juvenile defendants are entitled to confidentiality of records regardless of if the conditions of adjudication have been met.
JUVENILE CONFIDENTIALITYJUVENILE CONFIDENTIALITY
-- AG Opinion/Records AccessAG Opinion/Records Access
� The Office of Court Administration submitted an RQ with the Attorney General’s Office to determine if SB 393 and HB 528 can be reconciled.� RQ-1136-GA
� Your opinion: are SB 393 and HB 528 reconcilable?
� There was no changeno change in who has access to confidential juvenile records:� Judges and court staff
� Criminal Justice Agencies for criminal justice purposes
Art. 44.2811. RECORDS RELATING TO CHILDREN CONVICTED OF OR RECEIVING DEFERRED
DISPOSITION FOR FINE-ONLY MISDEMEANORS. (a) This article applies only to a misdemeanor offense
punishable by fine only, other than a traffic offense.
(b) All records and files and information stored by electronic means or otherwise, from which a
record or file could be generated, relating to a child who is convicted of and has satisfied the judgment
for or who has received a dismissal after deferral of disposition for an [a fine-only misdemeanor]
offense described by Subsection (a) [other than a traffic offense] are confidential and may not be
disclosed to the public except as provided under Article 45.0217(b). [All records and files and
information stored by electronic means or otherwise, from which a record or file could be generated,
relating to a child whose conviction for a fine-only misdemeanor other than a traffic offense is affirmed
are confidential upon satisfaction of the judgment and may not be disclosed to the public except as
provided under Article 45.0217(b).]
SECTION 4. Article 45.0217, Code of Criminal Procedure, is amended to read as follows:
Art. 45.0217. CONFIDENTIAL RECORDS RELATED TO THE CONVICTION OF OR DEFERRAL OF
DISPOSITION FOR A CHILD. (a) This article applies only to a misdemeanor offense punishable by fine
only, other than a traffic offense.
(a-1) Except as provided by Article 15.27 and Subsection (b), all records and files, including
those held by law enforcement, and information stored by electronic means or otherwise, from which
a record or file could be generated, relating to a child who is convicted of and has satisfied the
judgment for or who has received a dismissal after deferral of disposition for an [a fine-only
misdemeanor] offense described by Subsection (a) [other than a traffic offense] are confidential and
may not be disclosed to the public.
(b) Information subject to Subsection (a-1) [(a)] may be open to inspection only by:
(1) judges or court staff;
(2) a criminal justice agency for a criminal justice purpose, as those terms are defined
by Section 411.082, Government Code;
(3) the Department of Public Safety;
(4) an attorney for a party to the proceeding;
(5) the child defendant; or
(6) the defendant's parent, guardian, or managing conservator.
HB 528- Juvenile Records
SECTION 1. Article 44.2811, Code of Criminal Procedure, is amended to read as follows:
Art. 44.2811. RECORDS RELATING TO CERTAIN [CHILDREN CONVICTED OF] FINE-ONLY
MISDEMEANORS COMMITTED BY A CHILD. [All records and files and information stored by electronic
means or otherwise, from which a record or file could be generated, relating to a child who is
convicted of and has satisfied the judgment for a fine-only misdemeanor offense other than a traffic
offense are confidential and may not be disclosed to the public except as provided under Article
45.0217(b).] All records and files and information stored by electronic means or otherwise, from which
a record or file could be generated, relating to a criminal case [child whose conviction] for a fine-only
misdemeanor, other than a traffic offense, that is committed by a child and that is appealed [affirmed]
are confidential [upon satisfaction of the judgment] and may not be disclosed to the public except as
provided under Article 45.0217(b).
SECTION 2. The heading to Article 45.0217, Code of Criminal Procedure, is amended to read as
follows:
Art. 45.0217. CONFIDENTIAL RECORDS RELATED TO CHARGES AGAINST OR THE CONVICTION
OF A CHILD.
SECTION 3. Article 45.0217(a), Code of Criminal Procedure, is amended to read as follows:
(a) Except as provided by Article 15.27 and Subsection (b), all records and files, including those
held by law enforcement, and information stored by electronic means or otherwise, from which a
record or file could be generated, relating to a child who is charged with, is convicted of, is found not
guilty of, had a charge dismissed for, or is granted deferred disposition [and has satisfied the judgment]
for a fine-only misdemeanor offense other than a traffic offense are confidential and may not be
disclosed to the public.
SECTION 4. Section 58.00711, Family Code, is amended to read as follows:
Sec. 58.00711. RECORDS RELATING TO CHILDREN CHARGED WITH OR CONVICTED OF FINE-
ONLY MISDEMEANORS. Except as provided by Article 45.0217(b), Code of Criminal Procedure, all
records and files and information stored by electronic means or otherwise, from which a record or file
could be generated, relating to a child who is charged with, is convicted of, is found not guilty of, had a
charge dismissed for, or is granted deferred disposition [and has satisfied the judgment] for a fine-only
misdemeanor offense other than a traffic offense are confidential and may not be disclosed to the
public.
SECTION 5. Articles 44.2811 and 45.0217, Code of Criminal Procedure, and Section 58.00711,
Family Code, as amended by this Act, apply to an offense committed before, on, or after the effective
date of this Act.
SECTION 6. This Act takes effect January 1, 2014.
0 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS
GREG ABBOTT
Mr. David Slayton Administrative Director Office of Court Administration Post Office Box 12066 Austin, Texas 78711-2066
Dear Mr. Slayton:
January 2, 2014
Opinion No. GA-1035
Re: Confidentiality of records in juvenile misdemeanor cases (RQ-1136-GA)
You ask four questions regarding recent amendments to articles 44.2811 and 45.0217 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and section 58.00711 of the Family Code (the "confidentiality statutes"). 1 You explain that the Eighty-third Legislature adopted three bills-Senate Bill 393, Senate Bill 394, and House Bill 528-tbat amended each of the confidentiality statutes. Request Letter at 1-2. Senate Bills 393 and 394 became effective on September 1, 2013? Your questions arise because when House Bill 528 becomes effective on January 1, 2014,3 there will be two versions of each of the confidentiality statutes, and you are unsure how to reconcile them.4 !d. at 2. Senate Bill 394 incorporates the pertinent amendments of Senate Bill 393, so we refer generally to the "Senate Bills" and the "House Bill."
You first ask whether the Senate Bills irreconcilably conflict with the House Bill. !d. Like the courts, our primary objective when construing statutes "is to ascertain and give effect to the Legislature's intent." TGS-NOPEC Geophysical Co. v. Combs, 340 S.W.3d 432, 439 (Tex. 2011 ). At the outset, we assume that the Legislature, in enacting a statute, intended for the entire
1Letter from Mr. David Slayton, Admin. Dir., Office of Ct. Admin., to Honorable Greg Abbott, Tex. Att'y Gen. at 2-3 (July 10, 2013), http://www.texasattomeygeneral.gov/opin ("Request Letter").
2See Act of May 23, 2013, 83d Leg., R.S., ch. 1407, § 23, 2013 Tex. Sess. Law Serv. 3732, 3738 (Senate Bill393); Act of May 16,2013, 83d Leg., R.S., ch. 1319, § 5, 2013 Tex. Sess. Law Serv. 3501, 3502 (Senate Bill 394).
3 See Act of May 22, 2013, 83d Leg., R.S., ch. 1257, § 6, 2013 Tex. Sess. Law Serv. 3181, 3182 (House Bill 528).
4We received briefing concerning the effect of House Bill 528 on the constitutional openness of criminal courts. However, you did not raise that issue in your request, so we do not address it here.
Mr. David Slayton - Page 2 (GA-1035)
statute to be effective and intended a just and reasonable result that is feasible of execution. TEX. Gov'T CODE ANN. § 311.021 (West 2013). When "amendments to the same statute are enacted at the same session of the legislature, one amendment without reference to another, the amendments shall be harmonized, if possible, so that effect may be given to each." !d. § 311.025(b). The Senate Bills make no reference to the House Bill, and vice versa. Further, nothing in the language of the Senate Bills precludes the amendments contained in the House Bill, and none of the bills contain a saving provision that resolves potential conflicts with other laws. Thus, we look to the plain language of the confidentiality statutes as amended by the Senate Bills and the House Bill to determine whether they can be harmonized. To that end, this office has previously stated that an irreconcilable conflict exists when it is impossible to comply with both provisions at the same time. Tex. Att'y Gen. Op. No. GA-0369 (2005) at 4 (relying on State v. Jackson, 370 S.W.2d 797, 800 (Tex. Civ. App.-Houston [1st Dist.] 1963), aff'd, 376 S.W.2d 341 (Tex. 1964)).
Article 44.2811 is located in chapter 44 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which governs appeals and writs of error. See generally TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. arts. 44.01-.47 (West 2006 & Supp. 2013). As amended by the Senate Bills, article 44.2811 provides that records relating to "a child who is convicted of and has satisfied the judgment for or who has received a dismissal after deferral of disposition for" a non-traffic, fine-only misdemeanor offense may not be disclosed to the public. !d. art. 44.2811 (West Supp. 2013). The House Bill amends article 44.2811 to prohibit the disclosure of records relating to a non-traffic, fine-only misdemeanor offense "that is committed by a child and that is appealed."5 Taken together, the Senate Bills and the House Bill establish three separate, independent conditions for confidentiality under article 44.2811. As a result, complying with the Senate Bills does not result in violating the House Bill, and vice versa. Therefore, with respect to article 44.2811, the amendments of the Senate Bills and the House Bill do not irreconcilably conflict.
Article 45.0217 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, applicable to justice and municipal courts, and section 58.00711 of the Family Code, applicable to juvenile justice courts, are virtually identical, so we discuss them together. The Senate Bills amend these statutes to make confidential records "relating to a child who is convicted of and has satisfied the judgment for or who has received a dismissal after deferral of disposition for" a non-traffic, fine-only misdemeanor offense. TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 45.0217 (West Supp. 2013); TEX. FAM. CODE ANN. § 58.00711 (West Supp. 2013). The House Bill makes confidential any records "relating to a child who is charged with, is convicted of, is found not guilty of, had a charge dismissed for, or is granted deferred disposition for" such an offense. 6
5 Act of May 22, 2013, 83d Leg., R.S., ch. 1257, § 1, 2013 Tex. Sess. Law Serv. 3181, 3181 (to be codified at TEX. CODE CR!M. PROC. ANN. art. 44.2811 (West Supp. 2013)).
6Act of May 22,2013, 83d Leg., R.S., ch. 1257, §§ 3-4,2013 Tex. Sess. Law Serv. 3181,3181-82 (to be codified at TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 45.0217 (West Supp. 20 13); TEX. F AM. CODE ANN. § 58.00711 (West Supp. 2013)).
Mr. David Slayton - Page 3 (GA-1035)
The conditions of the House Bill include both of the conditions of the Senate Bills. 7
Thus, a court that withholds a record pursuant to the Senate Bills would also be complying with the House Bill. Indeed, some records will be required to be withheld under the House Bill but not the Senate Bills. This does not mean, however, that withholding such records violates the Senate Bills, for noncompliance with a confidentiality statute occurs only if a court discloses a record that the statute requires to be withheld, and none of the amendments in the Senate Bills or the House Bill require the disclosure of records under any circumstances. A court, then, may simultaneously comply with the amendments of both the Senate Bills and the House Bill. Therefore, with respect to article 45.0217 and section 58.00711, the Senate Bills and the House Bill do not irreconcilably conflict. Because your second question assumes that a conflict exists, we do not address it.
In your third question, you ask whether the Senate Bills went into effect on September 1, 2013, and whether the provisions of the House Bill will supplant the provisions of the Senate Bills when it goes into effect on January 1, 2014. Request Letter at 3. The Senate Bills became effective on September 1, 2013.8 Because the Senate Bills and the House Bill do not conflict, they will each be effective on January 1, 2014.
In your fourth question, you ask (1) whether the enactment of the House Bill means that all non-traffic, fine-only misdemeanor cases involving children in justice and municipal courts will need to be closed to the public, and (2) whether the dockets in such cases can be publicly posted. Request Letter at 3. The confidentiality statutes govern "[a]ll records and files and information stored by electronic means or otherwise, from which a record or file could be generated." TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. arts. 44.2811 (West Supp. 2013), 45.0217(a) (describing "all records and files" as "including those held by law enforcement"); TEX. FAM. CODE ANN. § 58.0071l(b) (West Supp. 2013). As amended by the House Bill, the statutes do not make live courtroom proceedings confidential, and the Code of Criminal Procedure generally provides that "[t]he proceedings and trials in all courts shall be public." TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 1.24 (West 2005); see also id. art. 45.041(d) (West Supp. 2013) ("All judgments, sentences, and final orders of the justice or judge shall be rendered in open court."). Thus, a court would likely conclude that the Senate Bills and the House Bill do not require that
7With regard to article 45.0217 and section 58.00711, the House Bill arguably makes the Senate Bills superfluous, and "[c]ourts 'do not lightly presume that the Legislature may have done a useless act' or enacted a meaningless statute." Tex. Att'y Gen. Op. No. GA-1014 (2013) at 2-3 (quoting Tex. Lottery Comm 'n v. First Bank ofDeQueen, 325 S.W.3d 628,637 (Tex. 2010)). However, as discussed herein, the Senate Bills became effective on September 1, 2013, four months before the House Bill, indicating that the Legislature intended for the Senate Bills to operate independently during that time. Therefore, it cannot be said that the Legislature, in adopting the Senate Bills, "enacted a meaningless statute .... " If, in practice, the House Bill obviates the Senate Bills, the "wisdom or expediency of the law is the Legislature's prerogative." Smith v. Davis, 426 S.W.2d 827, 831 (Tex. 1968).
8Act of May 23,2013, 83d Leg., R.S., ch. 1407, § 23,2013 Tex. Sess. Law Serv. 3732,3738 (Senate Bill 393); Act ofMay 16,2013, 83d Leg., R.S., ch. 1319, § 5, 2013 Tex. Sess. Law Serv. 3501,3502 (Senate Bill394).
Mr. David Slayton - Page 4 (GA-1035)
courtroom proceedings in all non-traffic, fine-only misdemeanor cases involving children be closed to the public.
A docket is subject to the confidentiality statutes to the extent that it is a "record" or a "file." See, e.g., id. arts. 44.2811(b), 45.0217(a). Because neither "record" nor "file" is defined in the Code of Criminal Procedure, a court will look to their common meanings and the context in which they are used for guidance. City of Rockwall v. Hughes, 246 S.W.3d 621, 625-26 (Tex. 2008). A "docket" can be defined both as a "formal record [of] all the proceedings and filings in a court case" and as a "schedule of pending cases." BLACK'S LAw DICTIONARY 552 (9th ed. 2009). The former is similar to "record" when that word is defined as "[t]he official report of the proceedings in a case, including the filed papers, a verbatim transcript of the trial or hearing (if any), and tangible exhibits." !d. at 1387. The "formal record" definition of docket is also analogous to "file," defined as "[a] court's complete and official record of a case." !d. at 704. Such dockets, therefore, are confidential as provided by the Senate Bills and the House Bill. By contrast, a "schedule" docket is merely an administrative instrument used by a court to provide general public notice of pending hearings and proceedings. As such, a court would likely conclude that such a "docket" is not a "record" or "file" subject to the confidentiality statutes.
Mr. David Slayton - Page 5 (GA-1035)
SUMMARY
Senate Bill 393, Senate Bill 394, and House Bill 528, enacted by the Eighty-third Texas Legislature, do not irreconcilably conflict. Senate Bills 393 and 394 became effective on September 1, 2013. House Bill 528 will become effective on January 1, 2014. A court would likely conclude that the enactment of House Bill 528 will not require that the proceedings of nontraffic, fine-only misdemeanor cases involving children in justice and municipal courts must be closed to the public.
DANIEL T. HODGE First Assistant Attorney General
JAMES D. BLACKLOCK Deputy Attorney General for Legal Counsel
VIRGINIA K. HOELSCHER Chair, Opinion Committee
Stephen L. Tatum, Jr.
Very truly yours,
Assistant Attorney General, Opinion Committee
From the General Counsel: January 10, 2014 Page 1
Making Sense of GA-1035: Attorney General Opines Conflicts Between Recent Juvenile
Confidentiality Amendments Are Not Irreconcilable
Ryan Kellus Turner
General Counsel and Director of Education
TMCEC
On January 2, 2014, the Office of the Attorney General of Texas issued Opinion No. GA-1035. The
announcement of the opinion, which has been highly anticipated by courts and juvenile justice
practitioners since last summer, is of particular interest to courts with jurisdiction of fine-only
misdemeanors involving children. It was issued in response to a request from the Office of Court
Administration (OCA) on July 10, 2013 (RQ-1136-GA).
The conflicts between S.B. 3931/S.B 394
2 and H.B. 528
3 are detailed in the August 2013 issue of The
Recorder. The conflict is also featured in the presentation on juvenile records featured in AY 2014
TMCEC Regional Programs.
As a preliminary matter, it is important to note that attorney general opinions do not relieve courts of their
duty to construe and reconcile statutes. An attorney general opinion is not a judgment by a court of
competent jurisdiction.4 As the Court of Criminal Appeals has stated, while attorney general opinions are
persuasive, they are not binding on courts.5 As one Texas Attorney General explained, an attorney general
opinion is highly persuasive only when it coincides with a court’s view of the law.6
I. Questions Answered
A. Whether H.B. 528 irreconcilably conflicts with S.B. 393 and S.B. 394?
In the opinion of the Attorney General, S.B. 393, S.B 394 and H.B. 528 do not irreconcilably conflict.
The Attorney General believes that the amendments to Article 44.2811 of the Code of Criminal Procedure
by the Senate Bills and House Bill, which govern records relating to children accused of non-traffic fine-
only misdemeanors when a case is before a court other than a court governed by Chapter 45 of the Code
of Criminal Procedure (i.e., county courts and appellate courts; not a municipal or justice court), “[t]aken
together, …establish three separate, independent conditions for confidentiality ...”7 Confidentiality
attaches when: (1) a child is convicted and has satisfied the judgment; (2) the child receives a dismissal
after deferral of disposition; or (3) the case is appealed.8
In terms of Article 45.0217 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, applicable to justice and municipal courts,
and Section 58.00711 of the Family Code, applicable to juvenile courts and juvenile records, the Attorney
General believes that “[t]he conditions of the House Bill include both of the conditions of the Senate
Bills.” H.B. 528 states that except as provided by Article 45.0217(b), all information may not be disclosed
to the public if the child either (1) is charged, (2) is convicted, (3) is found not guilty, (4) had a charged
dismissed, or (5) is granted deferred disposition. S.B. 393 and S.B. 394 state that except as provided by
Article 45.0217(b), all information may not be disclosed to the public if the child either (1) is convicted of
and has satisfied the judgment or (2) receives a dismissal after a deferral of disposition. The opinion
concedes in a footnote that this construction of the two versions of Article 45.0217 and Section 58.0711
arguably make the Senate Bills superfluous (i.e., redundant or unnecessary), but because H.B. 528 had an
enactment date four months after S.B. 393 and S.B. 394, it cannot be said that the Senate Bills enacted a
meaningless statute because the Senate Bills operated independently during that time.9 The opinion states
that some records will be required to be withheld under H.B. 528 but not under S.B. 393 and S.B. 394.
What records the Attorney General is referring to are not stated. Presumably, he is referring to cases in
From the General Counsel: January 10, 2014 Page 2
which a child is charged, found not guilty, the charge has been dismissed, or deferred disposition is
granted. The Attorney General, citing a Supreme Court opinion, states that if in practice this obviates (i.e.,
removes or precludes) the Senate Bills, the “wisdom or expediency of law is the Legislature’s
prerogative.”10
A violation of a confidentiality statute only occurs when a court discloses a record that the
statute requires to be withheld.
B. What is the effective date of each amendment and did the House Bill supplant the Senate Bills?
The Attorney General states, “The Senate Bills became effective on September 1, 2013. Because the
Senate Bills and the House Bills do not conflict, they will each be effective on January 1, 2014.”11