HBA-KMH H.B. 2190 76(R)    BILL ANALYSIS


Office of House Bill AnalysisH.B. 2190
By: Hinojosa
Criminal Jurisprudence
3/22/1999
Introduced



BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE 

Presumptive evidence, as defined by Black's Law Dictionary, is evidence
which must be received and treated as true and sufficient until and unless
rebutted by other evidence.  Currently, in order to prosecute a person for
failing to subsequently deliver a check or sight order as promised after
delivery of a good or service, the prosecutor is required to provide some
proof that the person who promised payment never intended to pay for the
property.  H.B. 2190 places the burden of proof on the person who received
the goods or services to show that the person intended to make the promised
payment, if payment was not received within seven days of delivery. 

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. 

SECTION BY SECTION ANALYSIS

SECTION 1.  Amends Section 31.06, Penal Code, by adding Subsection (g), as
follows: 

(g) Provides an additional presumption to the offense of theft that if the
actor obtains property by promising the delivery of a check or similar
sight order for the payment of money, the actor's failure to deliver the
check or order not later than the seventh day after the date the actor
obtained the property is prima facie evidence of the actor's intent to
deprive the owner of property under Section 31.03 (Theft), Penal Code. 

SECTION 2.  Makes application of this Act prospective.

SECTION 3.  Effective date: September 1, 1999.

SECTION 4.  Emergency clause.