Monitoring the Session

SB 1573

Police Can’t Tell Prosecutors About Misconduct Until It’s Finally Sustained

Died in committee

Verdict: Smells

SmellsNeeds review
Sen. Brian BirdwellRSenate 22
Why it's charged
Caption mismatch

THE TEXT

…“misconduct by a peace officer is not considered finally adjudicated”…

Bill text, introduced version (I)

The caption speaks of 'unsubstantiated' information, but the body blocks anything not finally ruled sustained, including findings still under appeal. The caption also never mentions the new district-court petition for officers.

Caption mismatch

Needs review · Nov 1, 2026 · Headline, summary and grade are analysis of the bill text, not a finding about any person · How we grade

Caption

relating to a limitation on the use of certain unsubstantiated information relating to peace officer misconduct.

Caption from analyzed text · version I.

Summary

Caption: “unsubstantiated.” Bill: even findings under appeal. Flagged officers can sue in district court.

This bill bars police agencies from telling prosecutors about a misconduct allegation against an officer who will testify unless the allegation has been finally ruled sustained, and it bars prosecutors from weighing any such allegation when judging the officer's credibility. It touches every state and local police agency, every district, county and city prosecutor, and peace officers who serve as witnesses. It also lets an officer flagged by a prosecutor sue in district court to contest the allegation, and if the court finds it unsupported, prosecutors may not consider it.

Labels

Labels: ZOMBIE BILL. Died 2 times: 88R HB 799 by Rep. Cody Harris (Died in committee) and this bill (Died in committee). Checked against 88R only.DO-OVER. Reworked text of a bill filed before that died: 88R HB 799 by Rep. Cody Harris (Died in committee). Filed in 2 sessions, counting this one. Checked against 88R only.TRY NO. 2. Filed in 2 sessions: 88R and 89R. Checked against 88R only.PENDING FOREVER. Heard by the Senate Criminal Justice committee on Apr 29, 2025 and left pending. Never voted out. The bill died.

Receipt

The receipt

89R-SB1573 · 2025-02-24

SOLD BY

+ 1 coauthor

ITEM

relating to a limitation on the use of certain unsubstantiated information relating to peace officer misconduct.

WHAT IT DOES

Caption: “unsubstantiated.” Bill: even findings under appeal. Flagged officers can sue in district court.

This bill bars police agencies from telling prosecutors about a misconduct allegation against an officer who will testify unless the allegation has been finally ruled sustained, and it bars prosecutors from weighing any such allegation when judging the officer's credibility. It touches every state and local police agency, every district, county and city prosecutor, and peace officers who serve as witnesses. It also lets an officer flagged by a prosecutor sue in district court to contest the allegation, and if the court finds it unsupported, prosecutors may not consider it.

CHARGES

[x] CAPTION MISMATCHanalysis confidence 45%

THE TEXT

…“misconduct by a peace officer is not considered finally adjudicated”…

Bill text, introduced version (I)

The caption speaks of 'unsubstantiated' information, but the body blocks anything not finally ruled sustained, including findings still under appeal. The caption also never mentions the new district-court petition for officers.

TOTAL

No first-year general revenue figure available here.

LBB estimate · fiscal note version I · source

Sources

Fiscal note · version I · April 28, 2025

The fiscal implications of the bill cannot be determined due to an unknown number of petition filings resulting from the bill.

LBB published estimates · flow over the stated periods.

Source snapshot 2026-10-19, Central time.

HISTORY

  1. Received by the Secretary of the Senate
  2. Filed
  3. Read first time
  4. Referred to Criminal Justice
  5. Co-author authorized
  6. Scheduled for public hearing on . . .
  7. Considered in public hearing
  8. Testimony taken in committee
  9. Left pending in committee
FILED UNDER

SPEECH AND LAWFARE

THE TEXT

…“determination by filing a petition in district court in the county”…

Bill text, introduced version (I)

The bill creates a new court action that lets officers challenge a prosecutor's credibility finding or a misconduct report.

Smells

THANK YOU FOR CHECKING THE RECEIPT

CAMPAIGN PAID FOR BY

CAMPAIGN PAID FOR BY

Donors

Texans for Lawsuit Reform PAC Austin TX$30,000
Good Government Fund Fort Worth TX$10,000
Texas Oil & Gas Assn. Good Govt. Cmte Austin TX$10,000

Derived from itemized gifts, Jul 1, 2024 to Jun 30, 2026. State data as of Nov 4, 2026.

Not tied to this bill.

Sources

The author's campaign account only. Own money and internal transfers are separate on the member page.

$353,800 raised since Jul 1, 2024. Derived sum of published report totals. blank in the state's data, consistent with zero. Flow, Jul 1, 2024 through Jun 30, 2026. State filing data as of Nov 4, 2026. 4 of 4 filed reports carry a published figure.

$502,039 spent since Jul 1, 2024. Derived sum of published report totals. Flow, Jul 1, 2024 through Jun 30, 2026. State filing data as of Nov 4, 2026. 4 of 4 filed reports carry a published figure.

$731,044 cash on hand. Published report total. Stock, as of Jun 30, 2026. State filing data as of Nov 4, 2026.

$0 loans outstanding. Published report total. Stock, as of Jun 30, 2026. State filing data as of Nov 4, 2026.

Derived sum of itemized contributions in regular reports and uncovered special-session dates. Unitemized contributions are not included. Flow, Jul 1, 2024 through Jun 30, 2026. State filing data as of Nov 4, 2026.

Money

Missing data does not establish zero giving. Display amounts are rounded.

Votes

No floor vote loaded for this bill.

Fiscal

No first-year general revenue figure available here.

LBB estimate · fiscal note version I · source

Sources

Fiscal note · version I · April 28, 2025

The fiscal implications of the bill cannot be determined due to an unknown number of petition filings resulting from the bill.

LBB published estimates · flow over the stated periods.

Source snapshot 2026-10-19, Central time.

How this was graded

Analysis of text version I by claude-opus-5-5, Oct 19, 2026, against the published rubric.

FILED BEFORE

Filed 2 times: 88R and 89R. Checked against 88R only.

88R HB 799

by Rep. Cody Harris, different lead author · Died in committee · reworked

Introduced text

Last action, Apr 11, 2023: Left pending in committee

Relating to a limitation on the use of certain unsubstantiated information relating to peace officer misconduct.

Caption, 88R bill history

Sources

Texas Senate · Filed Feb 24, 2025

04/29/2025 S Left pending in committee

Texas Legislature Online · Introduced

Data snapshot Nov 1, 2026 at 2:09 PM CST. Grades, charges, quotes and corrections follow the published record.

Coauthors

Senate committee · Criminal Justice · Final status: Died in committee

Subjects

Courts--District

Criminal Procedure--General

Law Enforcement

PEACE OFFICERS

Text

The text as introduced · 583 words

89R12450 MZM-D

By: Birdwell
S.B. No. 1573

A BILL TO BE ENTITLED

AN ACT

relating to a limitation on the use of certain unsubstantiated

information relating to peace officer misconduct.

BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF TEXAS:

SECTION 1. The heading to Subchapter B, Chapter 2A, Code of

Criminal Procedure, is amended to read as follows:

SUBCHAPTER B. POWERS AND DUTIES OF [ PEACE OFFICERS AND ] LAW

ENFORCEMENT [ AGENCIES ]

SECTION 2. Chapter 2A, Code of Criminal Procedure, is

amended by adding Subchapter C-1 to read as follows:

SUBCHAPTER C-1. POWERS AND DUTIES OF LAW ENFORCEMENT AND ATTORNEYS

REPRESENTING THE STATE

Art. 2A.131. LIMITATION ON USE OF CERTAIN UNSUBSTANTIATED

INFORMATION RELATING TO PEACE OFFICER MISCONDUCT. (a) In this

article:

(1) "Attorney representing the state" means an

attorney authorized by law to represent the state in a criminal

case, including a district attorney, criminal district attorney,

county attorney with criminal jurisdiction, or city or municipal

attorney.

(2) "Law enforcement agency" means an agency of the

state or an agency of a political subdivision of the state

authorized by law to employ peace officers.

(b) A law enforcement agency may not disclose to an attorney

representing the state information relating to misconduct by a

peace officer who is or will serve as a witness in a criminal

proceeding unless the allegation of misconduct has been finally

adjudicated as sustained.

(c) When evaluating the credibility of a peace officer who

is serving or will serve as a witness in a criminal proceeding, the

attorney representing the state may not consider an allegation of

misconduct by the peace officer that has not been finally

adjudicated as sustained.

(d) For purposes of this article, an allegation of

misconduct by a peace officer is not considered finally adjudicated

as sustained if the allegation is currently under appeal through an

administrative process or judicial proceeding and the finder of

fact has not yet issued a finding.

(e) A peace officer who is the subject of a report of

misconduct submitted to an attorney representing the state by a law

enforcement agency or who has been notified of a determination by

the attorney representing the state that the officer is not

considered credible to testify in a criminal proceeding as a result

of an allegation of misconduct may dispute that report or

determination by filing a petition in district court in the county

in which the law enforcement agency is located. The attorney

representing the state shall provide specific details of the

allegation to the peace officer for purposes of a dispute made under

this subsection. On receiving a petition under this subsection,

the district court shall conduct a hearing to determine the

validity of the disputed allegation of misconduct in accordance

with Subsection (f).

(f) In a hearing under Subsection (e), the district court

shall determine by a preponderance of the evidence whether the

alleged misconduct occurred regardless of whether the applicable

officer was terminated or whether that officer resigned, retired,

or separated in lieu of termination. If the allegation of

misconduct is not supported by a preponderance of the evidence, the

court shall provide notice of the finding to any attorney

representing the state the petitioner identifies as having received

a report or as having made a determination as described by

Subsection (e). The attorney representing the state may not

consider the allegation of misconduct when evaluating the peace

officer's credibility as a witness.

SECTION 3. This Act takes effect September 1, 2025.