Video & Transcript Research : 'arrest warrant'

Page 1 of 235
TX

Texas 89th Regular

Criminal Jurisprudence Apr 8th, 2025

Criminal Jurisprudence

Transcript Highlights:
  • Warranted.
  • Adjust the fees imposed for executing or processing arrest warrants by a modest $25.
  • Of the millions of arrest warrants issued in our state annually, around 90% come from fine-only offenses
  • This bill proposes a long overdue increase in the fee for executing and processing arrest warrants from
  • for arrest warrants, including KPIs and KPIs pro fines.
TX

Texas 89th Regular

Criminal Justice May 20th, 2025

Criminal Justice

Transcript Highlights:
  • H.B. 2282 by Representative Janie Lopez is an arrest warrant fee increase currently.
  • Representative Janie Lopez is... an arrest warrant fee increase.
  • Currently, a defendant is required to pay $50 for the execution process of an arrest warrant.
  • House Bill 2282 would simply increase the arrest warrant fee from $50 to $75 because, as we all know,
  • This bill proposes a long-overdue increase in the fee for executing and processing arrest warrants from
Summary: The Senate Committee on Criminal Justice met with a quorum and heard a long agenda of bills on criminal justice, public safety, mental health, victims’ rights, and related administrative issues. Early bills included HB 47, the omnibus sexual assault survivors bill, which would expand post-assault care, require courts to consider delays for adult survivors, bar sex offenders from rideshare driving, allow lease termination regardless of where an assault occurred, and require more reporting from sexual assault response teams. Testimony was generally supportive, though one witness raised concern that the bill’s reporting requirements could jeopardize county grant funding. HB 171, the Annel Borrego Act, would set a minimum period for court-ordered chemical dependency treatment; NAMI Texas supported it. HB 908 would require missing children reports to be sent to the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children within two hours, and HB 1443 would criminalize possession and promotion of childlike sex dolls; both drew supportive testimony and were left pending. HB 567, changing juvenile board chair selection in Parker County, and HB 4263, a TJJD workforce retention bill, were also heard and left pending after brief discussion and adoption of committee substitutes where applicable. The committee also heard several bills focused on jail and prison safety, court process, and victim protection. HB 2282 would raise the arrest warrant fee from $50 to $75; constables supported it as a cost-recovery measure, while the Texas Fair Defense Project opposed it as a regressive fee that burdens low-income defendants. HB 3464 would increase penalties for correctional employees who bring drugs or alcohol into prisons, with support from Harris County jail officials and a formerly incarcerated advocate who described the dangers of contraband and retaliation. HB 285, “Poncho’s Law,” would add criminal negligence to non-livestock animal cruelty offenses; animal welfare advocates said it would close a loophole that lets pet service businesses avoid accountability, and the bill was left pending. HB 2355 would keep certain Crime Victims Compensation records confidential when held by the Attorney General, and HB 2637 would standardize jury exemption ages and clean up jury disqualification reporting; both were left pending after limited testimony. Mental health and competency-related bills received significant attention. HB 305 would require a pretrial hearing within 14 days after a defendant is restored to competency, aimed at reducing repeated decompensation and the forensic waitlist; NAMI Texas supported it. HB 1741 would tighten procedures for not-guilty-by-reason-of-insanity outpatient commitments by requiring a stronger nexus to the receiving county and clearer supervision authority; law enforcement and mental health witnesses said it would improve public safety and treatment success. HB 2492 would make the four-hour family-violence post-bond cooling-off period mandatory rather than discretionary, and HB 1445 would allow a managed assigned counsel director to designate someone to approve certain payments for indigent defense attorneys; both were left pending. HB 1024 would require prompt execution of warrants for parole violators on superintensive supervision, and HB 1306 would extend first-responder-style benefits to death investigation professionals; neither drew opposition in the hearing. The committee also heard a series of public integrity and technology bills. HB 449 would expand the deepfake sexual content statute to include sexually explicit images, with Public Citizen supporting the change as necessary to address a rapidly growing problem. HB 1902 would create a new offense for “jugging,” or following bank or ATM customers to rob them; the Texas Bankers Association supported it. HB 2697 would require sureties to notify prosecutors before surrendering a felony defendant’s bond, and HB 2001 would sharply increase penalties for misuse of public information for financial gain and related coercion, with prosecutors and Texas Rangers describing bid-rigging and public corruption investigations as difficult to prove under current law because of short limitations periods and limited penalties. HB 1866 would grant Texas peace officer authority to National Park Service rangers within Texas park boundaries, and HB 4996 would increase penalties for fraudulent liens filed against public servants. Throughout the hearing, most bills were left pending after testimony, and several committee substitutes were adopted without objection.
MN

Minnesota 2025-2026 Regular Session

House Education Policy Committee 2/18/26

Education Policy

Transcript Highlights:
  • in those warrants.
  • presented with a judicial warrant. presented with a judicial warrant.
  • requires proper judicial warrants requires proper judicial warrants identifications<00:09:20.000
  • Do they have a warrant? Then they can have access. Do they have a judicial warrant?
  • <01:14:45.760> Um, arrests and counting. Um, arrests and counting.
Bills: HF3435, HF3409
TX
Transcript Highlights:
  • Thus, searching a skimmer without a. warrant isn't a Fourth Amendment issue.
  • But she got a call from someone saying that my son had been arrested and was in jail.
  • One prior organized retail theft arrest.
  • Five felony, excuse me, eight felony theft. after arrest, and then five robberies.
  • are people and suspects that we have already arrested here in Texas.
TX
Transcript Highlights:
  • HB 2282 by Representative Janie Lopez is an arrest warrant fee increase.
  • Currently, a defendant is required to pay $50 for the execution process of an arrest warrant.
  • The bill proposes a long overdue increase in the fee for executing, processing, and arresting warrants
  • Of the millions of arrest warrants issued in our state annually, around 90% come from fine-only offenses
  • Despite having an outstanding arrest warrant for violating parole, authorities took three days to issue
OK
Transcript Highlights:
  • what about cost, arrest warrants, who uses them, who doesn't, how many people are in jail for just cost
  • , arrest warrants, and so on, so that's what we're doing with this bill.
  • what about cost, arrest warrants, who uses them, who doesn't, how many people are in jail for just cost
  • , arrest warrants, and so on, so that's what we're doing with this bill.
  • are in jail for just cost, arrest warrants, and so on, so that's what we're doing with this bill.
MN

Minnesota 2025-2026 Regular Session

House Children and Families Finance and Policy Committee 3/4/26

Children and Families Finance and Policy

Transcript Highlights:
  • arrest of a particular individual. arrest of a particular individual.
  • . warrant. warrant.
  • and they had no warrant for her. and they had no warrant for her.
  • Talks about warrants.
  • Talks about warrants. This is seizures." Talks about warrants.
Bills: HF3415
TX

Texas 89th Regular

Criminal Justice May 14th, 2025

Criminal Justice

Transcript Highlights:
  • an arrest.
  • that no probable cause exists to believe that a person committed an offense for which they were arrested
  • an arrest.
  • that no probable cause exists to believe that a person committed an offense for which they were arrested
  • or something... ...or of assaulting someone or improper arrest or something, and had been exonerated
Bills: SB3073, SJR87
Summary: The Senate Committee on Criminal Justice met with a quorum present and took up three bills tied to bail reform and law enforcement records. Senator Huffman presented SJR 87, a proposed constitutional amendment that would require denial of bail for people accused of certain serious felony offenses if they have a prior conviction for, or are already on bond for, one of those offenses and there is probable cause to believe they committed another listed offense. Supporters said it would give judges a needed tool to detain repeat violent offenders; opponents from the ACLU of Texas and Texas Civil Rights Project argued it would mandate detention without individualized due process and weaken the presumption of innocence. The committee voted 7-1 to report SJR 87 favorably, with Senator Miles voting no. The committee then heard SB 3073, which would require magistrates who find no probable cause after an arrest to enter written findings supporting that determination. Senator Huffman said the bill was a narrow cleanup measure to improve transparency and provide guidance to law enforcement and prosecutors without limiting judicial discretion. With no invited or public testimony, the committee voted 6-1 to report SB 3073 favorably, again with Senator Miles dissenting. Finally, the committee considered SB 781, a committee substitute dealing with law enforcement file management and personnel records. Senator King explained that the bill would standardize policies already used in many Texas cities and under civil service rules, separating public and sealed personnel information while preserving access for criminal defense discovery. Senator Miles raised concerns that sealing exonerated allegations could hide patterns of misconduct and allow problematic officers to move between agencies. The committee adopted the committee substitute and voted 6-1 to report SB 781 favorably, with Senator Miles voting no. The committee then recessed subject to the chair’s call.
TX

Texas 89th Regular

Homeland Security, Public Safety & Veterans' Affairs Mar 26th, 2025

Homeland Security, Public Safety & Veterans' Affairs

Transcript Highlights:
  • It states that outside the officer's jurisdiction, they may arrest without a warrant any person who commits
  • And they could not arrest them. They could not do anything on that one.
  • When looking at the requirements for record retention for an arrest, copies of warrants, affidavits,
  • It just costs too much, so we just can't arrest people now?
  • And how do you arrest them?
MN

Minnesota 2025-2026 Regular Session

House Judiciary Finance and Civil Law Committee 3/3/26

Judiciary Finance and Civil Law

Transcript Highlights:
  • comes to identifying such persons, and its use is more likely to result in an unjustified stop or arrest
  • <00:08:56.080> Testing unjustified stop or arrest. Testing unjustified stop or arrest.
  • A facial recognition investigative lead is not probable cause to arrest.
  • A facial recognition investigative lead is not probable cause to arrest.
  • A facial recognition investigative lead is not probable cause to arrest.
Summary: The committee approved the minutes from February 24 and February 26. It then took up House File 3661, a bill originally authored by Representative Gomez and presented by Representative Feist, which would ban government use of facial recognition technology and be re-referred to the Public Safety Finance and Policy Committee. The committee adopted the A1 amendment, described as a technical amendment based on House Research recommendations, before hearing testimony on the bill. Representative Feist said the bill is aimed at preventing serious privacy and civil-liberties harms, including secretive surveillance, racial and gender bias, and the lack of statewide rules governing government use of facial recognition. Supportive testimony came from Chad Marlo of the ACLU, who argued the issue is bipartisan, the technology has accuracy problems, and government use is expanding against vulnerable groups. Chris Wayland of Restore the Fourth Minnesota also supported a ban, emphasizing the inability to opt out of facial recognition and the lack of standards, disclosure, and community input. Rich Newmeister urged stronger transparency measures, including agency policies and public notice in buildings using the technology. Major Spencer Baky of the Hennepin County Sheriff's Office opposed an outright ban, saying facial recognition is used only as an investigative lead, not for positive identification or real-time surveillance, and that results are corroborated before use. He said the office has used the tool in hundreds of investigations and supports a statutory framework with safeguards instead of a ban. In member discussion, Representative Hudson argued a blanket ban was too broad and suggested a more targeted evidentiary approach, while Representative Moller and Representative Kurr expressed concern about misuse and the federal government's use of the technology. Representative Durant asked whether there was a current Minnesota problem and whether stakeholders and law enforcement had been involved in drafting the bill. No final vote on the bill was taken in the portion provided, beyond adoption of the amendment and the committee’s continued consideration of HF 3661.
TX
Transcript Highlights:
  • making no probable cause determinations when the facts suggest that there is clearly probable cause to warrant
  • an arrest.
  • that no probable cause exists to believe that a person committed an offense for which they were arrested
  • If they had been accused of maybe drinking on duty, or of assaulting someone, or improper arrest or something
Bills: SB3073, SJR87
TX

Texas 89th Regular

Criminal Jurisprudence Apr 29th, 2025

Criminal Jurisprudence

Transcript Highlights:
  • it to reflect the expunged arrest record.
  • All you have to say is that they have notice of an expunction order if an arrest is not on the arrest
  • warrant.
  • You said that the people that post the arrest record... What did you say?
  • A SWAT warrant. SEAL Team 6 does call-outs in Iraq.
TX

Texas 89th Regular

Criminal Jurisprudence Apr 29th, 2025

Criminal Jurisprudence

Transcript Highlights:
  • party, the court will maintain discretion to order sequestration on its own motion when circumstances warrant
  • By the time there's an arrest, people are sometimes pretty far gone, and our system isn't well equipped
FL

Florida 2026 Regular Session

Criminal Justice Feb 2nd, 2026

Criminal Justice

Transcript Highlights:
  • It authorizes law enforcement officers to make a warrantless arrest when the officer has probable cause
  • .and no-contact order or is on pretrial release for committing specified violent offenses and is arrested
  • As a former prosecutor, the bulk of evidence post-arrest for murder comes when, at the moment of arrest
  • For this one, SB 1488 is cited as the Child Protection at a Time of Parental Arrest Act.
  • The bill requires a booking officer... ...arrested person during the booking process.
Summary: The committee took up several criminal justice bills, beginning with SB 760 on violations of pretrial release conditions. A strike-all amendment narrowed the bill to make willful violation of a no-contact order a first-degree misdemeanor, authorize warrantless arrest on probable cause, and require detention until first appearance in certain cases. The amendment and the bill, as amended, were both adopted and reported favorably. The committee then heard SB 1536 on digital voyeurism, which would extend the expectation of privacy to backyards in the surveillance statute; it was reported favorably after brief questions and support from a Florida Smart Justice Alliance witness. Members next considered SB 1012 on inmate services. The bill would expand use of contractor-operated institutions inmate welfare trust funds for reintegration and facility upgrades, and would require reimbursement for inmate emergency and specialty medical services at Medicaid rates, with telehealth and autonomous APRNs included as options. Safety Net Hospital Alliance of Florida opposed the bill as written, warning that tying Medicaid participation to treatment of inmates could reduce reimbursement and discourage provider participation, while the Department of Corrections and Florida Smart Justice Alliance supported it. Senators discussed costs, aging inmates, and possible future changes, and the bill was reported favorably. The committee also passed CS for SB 600 on bail bond and pretrial release laws after adopting a strike-all that aligned it with the House companion and made technical changes to solicitation, training, and bond reinstatement rules. Public testimony raised concerns about who should receive returned bond money and how clerks would process payments, but the sponsor said the bill would continue to be refined. Later, the committee reconsidered and favorably reported SB 1750 on criminal sexual conduct, which increases penalties and mandatory minimums for serious sex crimes, especially those involving children. It also reconsidered and favorably reported SB 1544 on complaints against law enforcement and correctional officers, a bill requiring complainants to provide sworn complaints to officers before interrogation unless corroborating evidence is present; police chiefs and sexual violence advocates opposed parts of the bill, while supporters argued it would protect officers from unfounded complaints. Finally, SB 1488 on booking officer duties regarding minor children of arrested persons was reported favorably, and SB 1326 on prosecution of defamation was taken up for reconsideration with a delete-all amendment that narrowed the insanity defense, limited mitigation for severe mental illness in serious cases, and extended detention periods for incompetent defendants; opposition testimony from defense, public defender, and mental health advocates warned it would worsen treatment and increase costs.