tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8597101.post154048024031775421..comments2024-03-25T20:06:39.794-05:00Comments on Grits for Breakfast: Mug-shot media, tickets in school, and yet more discovery debate: Previewing Senate Criminal Justice highlightsGritsforbreakfasthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10152152869466958902noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8597101.post-24072119689529500052013-03-25T18:09:29.073-05:002013-03-25T18:09:29.073-05:00Hey Grits, regarding SB 1611 - anyone happen to kn...Hey Grits, regarding SB 1611 - anyone happen to know <br /> <br />*Pre-SB 1611 world - we currently rely on the Defense to research the client's case and file timely pre-trial discovery motions with the clerk of court where he / she time stamps each motion received. The trial court judge responds to each motion by filing a copy of the Court's Orders' form(s) with the clerk of court, either; 'Agree' or 'Denied'.<br /><br />Q. - If the Trial Judge refuses to respond via supplying a Court's Orders' to the Defense, Is it the duty of the Defense to simply let it go & file another Ready for Trial Notice?<br /><br />Q. - If there are no weapons found / confiscated or listed in the arrest report and / or associated in any way to a defendant (on probation), and the defense's pre-trial motions are ignored prior to trial date, can the ADA simply bring one to trial (having no chain of custody) and introduce it as a State's Exhibits & it not have any effect on the probation? Thanks.<br /><br />Note: if SB 1611 can prevent judges from Ignoring discovery motions & prevent ADAs from bringing in their own evidence having nothing to do with anyone other than the ADA, I'm all for it. If it leads to Anti-Dabbling measures - mandatory pre-trial legal credentials verification, I’ll do a back-flip.Thomas R.Griffithhttp://www.projectnotguilty.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8597101.post-62921630129599008222013-03-25T10:18:45.604-05:002013-03-25T10:18:45.604-05:00Apparently Sen. Whitmire is going to take care of ...Apparently Sen. Whitmire is going to take care of his buds in the bail industry. But did I miss something? I see that SB 669 offers bail industry types relief on the forfeited amount (government handout) through a special bill of review, but I can't find in the bill's language where it offers similar relief to personal bond defendants who - by definition - had no surety but are nonetheless responsible for the forfeited amount. Wonder why that is?Thomas Hobbeshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10832779920216463979noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8597101.post-20124438819580340552013-03-25T04:05:57.270-05:002013-03-25T04:05:57.270-05:00Regarding SB1289 by Williams. Everything is fine ...Regarding SB1289 by Williams. Everything is fine until you get to injunctive relief. <br /><br />You can fine him for the abuse of speech, but, injunctive relief is the curtailing of speech. <br /><br /><br />Article I Section 8 of the Texas Constitution:<br />Every person shall be at liberty to speak, write or publish his opinions on any subject, being responsible for the abuse of that privilege; and no law shall ever be passed curtailing the liberty of speech or of the press. In prosecutions for the publication of papers, investigating the conduct of officers, or men in public capacity, or when the matter published is proper for public information, the truth thereof may be given in evidence. And in all indictments for libels, the jury shall have the right to determine the law and the facts, under the direction of the court, as in other cases.Chris Hhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03837397319040457859noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8597101.post-25875812781913015412013-03-25T03:52:23.993-05:002013-03-25T03:52:23.993-05:00So, the bail bond lobby is out in force again. Se...So, the bail bond lobby is out in force again. Seriously, how much more lenient can we be on them?gravyrugnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8597101.post-75050622489961870932013-03-24T11:48:26.623-05:002013-03-24T11:48:26.623-05:00It's indirectly connected, 10:51. Part of the ...It's indirectly connected, 10:51. Part of the reason the hospitals don't want to give up the surcharge money is that if Texas doesn't do the Medicaid expansion their indigent care costs would not get reimbursed. If Texas did the Medicaid expansion, it would generate enough money for hospitals to let them phase out the DRP without feeling like nothing existed to replace it. It's an indirect correlation, though, not directly contingent.Gritsforbreakfasthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10152152869466958902noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8597101.post-9609257788388765892013-03-24T10:51:39.866-05:002013-03-24T10:51:39.866-05:00Hey I had a question for you. If the legislature a...Hey I had a question for you. If the legislature approves expanded Medicare for the lower income folks with government subsides, should that decision have an impact on that ill-conceived DPS surcharge fees? I mean, wasn’t that surcharge being used to partially fund indigent care in hospitals or am I way off base here? Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com