Texas House Bill HB 1977

Texas 2025 - 89th Regular

• Filed: 1/22/25

Caption

Relating to the admissibility of evidence of certain extraneous offenses or acts in the prosecution of sexual assault or aggravated sexual assault or an attempt or conspiracy to commit sexual assault or aggravated sexual assault.

Summary

HB 1977 amends Article 38.37 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure to expand the circumstances in which evidence of a defendant’s other crimes, wrongs, or acts may be admitted in prosecutions for sexual offenses. The bill specifically adds sexual assault and aggravated sexual assault, and attempts or conspiracies to commit those offenses, to the list of cases where extraneous-offense evidence involving the victim may be used to show relevant matters such as the defendant’s and victim’s state of mind and their prior or subsequent relationship. The bill also updates related provisions so that the evidence rules apply in a broader set of sexual and exploitation-related prosecutions, including offenses involving children and minors such as continuous sexual abuse, indecency with a child, online solicitation of a minor, sexual performance by a child, child pornography, trafficking of persons, and compelling prostitution. It is a criminal procedure change, not a new offense, and it applies only to proceedings that begin on or after September 1, 2025.

Impact

HB 1977 would broaden Texas evidentiary law by allowing prosecutors in sexual assault and aggravated sexual assault cases to introduce more extraneous-act evidence under Article 38.37, overriding Texas Rules of Evidence 404 and 405 in the covered cases. This could affect how juries hear evidence about prior conduct between the accused and the complainant, and it may make it easier for the state to present relationship-pattern evidence in sexual violence prosecutions. The bill applies prospectively to criminal proceedings commenced on or after its effective date, leaving earlier cases governed by prior law.

Sentiment

The available context suggests the bill was treated as a criminal justice measure focused on strengthening prosecutions in sexual violence cases, with no recorded votes or committee testimony indicating organized opposition or support in the provided materials. Its placement in the Criminal Jurisprudence Committee and the nature of the amendment indicate a generally law-enforcement- and victim-protective orientation. Because the bill was left pending in committee, the record provided does not show final legislative consensus or a floor vote.

Contention

The main potential point of contention is the expansion of admissible extraneous-offense evidence, which can raise due process and fairness concerns for defendants because it allows juries to hear about other acts beyond the charged offense. Supporters would likely view the change as necessary to help prove patterns of abuse, grooming, coercion, or the relationship between the parties in sexual assault cases, especially where credibility is central. Opponents, if any, would likely focus on the risk of prejudice and the possibility that such evidence could be used to infer propensity rather than prove the charged conduct.