Relating to rights of a victim, guardian of a victim, or close relative of a deceased victim in certain criminal cases involving family violence, sexual or assaultive offenses, stalking, or a violation of a protective order or condition of bond and to the duration of certain protective orders.
SB 1120 expands and clarifies victim rights in Texas criminal cases involving family violence, sexual assault, stalking, trafficking, assaultive offenses, and violations of protective orders or bond conditions. The bill updates definitions in the Code of Criminal Procedure so that “family violence” and “victim” cover a broader set of offenses and circumstances, including certain violations of protective orders or bond conditions when they involve assault, aggravated assault, sexual assault, or stalking. It also creates a new Article 56A.0521 to give victims of certain family violence, stalking, and protective-order-related offenses additional notice, information, and consultation rights.
The bill strengthens victims’ access to case information and participation in the criminal justice process. It requires notice about evidence collection and testing, crime lab submissions, DNA database comparisons, plea negotiations, and the disposition of the case; it also confirms that victims may designate a third party or service provider to receive some notices. For certain offenses, the bill adds rights tied to protective orders, including notice that a protective order may be sought, the ability to ask the prosecutor to file one, and notice when the prosecutor does file. It also clarifies that an advocate may obtain certain parole-related information on the victim’s behalf, and it removes a prior reference to stalking from the heading of the sexual assault victim-rights article while creating a separate article for family-violence-related rights.
SB 1120 also changes protective-order duration rules in the Family Code. In specified family-law and criminal-case situations, protective orders may now remain effective until two years after the final decree in a divorce, two years after the final order in a parent-child suit, or two years after final disposition of a qualifying criminal case involving family violence or certain offenses against children. The bill further extends protective orders when the restrained person is incarcerated, delaying expiration until one or two years after release depending on the length of the sentence. It also makes a conforming change so parole confidentiality rules do not limit information sharing required under the victim-rights provisions.
The overall sentiment around the bill appears strongly supportive and largely noncontroversial. It passed the House by a wide margin, and the Senate initially passed it unanimously before concurring in House amendments with only one dissenting vote. The voting history suggests broad bipartisan agreement that the bill improves victim notification, participation, and safety protections.
The main points of contention appear limited and technical rather than ideological. The bill’s expanded victim-rights and protective-order provisions may raise administrative burdens for prosecutors, law enforcement, and courts, especially around notice obligations and coordination with victims or designated advocates. The only visible opposition in the recorded votes was minimal, indicating that any disagreement was likely about details of implementation or scope rather than the bill’s overall purpose.
SB 1120 amends multiple provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure and Family Code to expand victim-notification rights, authorize additional prosecutor-facilitated protective-order procedures, and lengthen the duration of certain protective orders. It also makes a conforming change to Government Code parole confidentiality provisions so they do not restrict information disclosures required by the victim-rights statutes. The bill applies prospectively to offenses committed on or after September 1, 2025, and to protective orders rendered on or after that date.
The bill was received positively overall, with overwhelming support in both chambers and only a small number of dissenting votes in the House and Senate concurrence. The vote pattern indicates broad agreement on strengthening protections for victims of family violence, sexual assault, stalking, and related offenses. No committee transcript was provided, but the legislative history suggests the measure was viewed as a victim-safety and procedural-rights bill rather than a controversial policy change.
There is little evidence of major controversy in the available record. Any concerns likely centered on implementation details, such as the added duties for prosecutors, law enforcement, courts, and victim-service systems to provide notices, process protective-order requests, and manage extended order durations. The bill also narrows or reorganizes some existing statutory language, which may have prompted technical review, but the recorded votes show no substantial opposition to the bill’s core provisions.