Relating to the authority of a peace officer commissioned by the comptroller to apply for an order authorizing the installation and use of a mobile tracking device.
Summary
SB 993 amends the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure to expand who may apply to a district judge for an order authorizing the installation and use of a mobile tracking device. Under current law, such an application may be made by an authorized peace officer; this bill adds a peace officer commissioned by the comptroller to that list. The measure is narrow and procedural, focused on law-enforcement authority in obtaining judicial approval for electronic tracking in criminal investigations.
The bill does not create a new tracking power or change the standards for issuing a tracking-device order. Instead, it clarifies that comptroller-commissioned peace officers may seek the same court authorization already available to other authorized peace officers. The act would take effect immediately if approved by a two-thirds vote in each chamber, or otherwise on September 1, 2025.
Impact
SB 993 would amend Article 18B.202(a) of the Code of Criminal Procedure by expressly including peace officers commissioned by the comptroller among those who may apply for a mobile tracking device order. This affects criminal procedure and investigative authority by broadening the set of officers eligible to request judicial authorization for electronic location tracking. The practical impact is limited to law-enforcement agencies and officers operating under comptroller commission authority, while leaving the underlying judicial warrant/order process unchanged.
Sentiment
The available legislative record suggests little visible controversy or opposition. The bill advanced through the criminal justice committees and reached the House general state calendar, and the recorded vote history shown does not reflect any dissent on the listed procedural actions. Overall, the measure appears to have been treated as a technical or clarifying criminal-justice bill rather than a major policy change.
Contention
No committee transcript is available, and the provided vote history does not show recorded nays on the listed actions, so there is no documented substantive opposition in the materials provided. Any potential point of contention would likely center on privacy and surveillance concerns associated with mobile tracking devices, but the bill itself does not expand surveillance standards; it only expands who may apply for an order. Support would likely come from law-enforcement interests seeking administrative clarity and broader investigative access for comptroller-commissioned officers.
Relating to the definition of authorized peace officer for purposes of certain laws governing the installation and use of tracking equipment and access to certain communications.
Relating to the definition of authorized peace officer for purposes of certain laws governing the installation and use of tracking equipment and access to certain communications.