Updates 3.17.2025

TJCTC Updates Header

Lots of Legal Information

This update is full of legal information and updates. Make sure to scroll all the way to the bottom for a new resource you can share with your communities as well. 

There are also several great webinars and trainings coming up, both from TJCTC and other outside groups. 

Clarifications & Updates from Recent Classes

CDL Issued by Mexico

The Legislature changed how the law operates for people who aren’t authorized under federal law to work in the United States but are operating a CMV using a CDL issued by Mexico. HB 4337 modified Transportation Code Sec. 522.015 to state that people who meet that description are only allowed to operate the vehicle in counties which border Mexico.

“Over Group of Axles”

Courts have begun seeing citations for “over group of axles” in some areas. Transportation Code Sec. 621.101 provides three different weight restrictions related to axles. (a)(1) limits a single axle weight to 20,000 pounds, (a)(2) limits a tandem axle weight (two axles directly adjacent to one another) to 34,000 pounds, and subsection (a)(3) limits the overall gross weight on a “group of two or more consecutive axles.” The limit for the “group of axles” is determined by the formula listed in Sec. 621.101(a)(3), which is based on the number of axles and the distance between them.

Legal Question of the Month

Question: We have several juveniles that had 2 charges filed on them in a single incident. How do we handle this with Juvenile Diversion?

Answer: This situation is not expressly dealt with in the juvenile criminal diversion statutes.

Therefore, it is ultimately up to the court how they want to handle the citation/charges.  

TJCTC’s position is that the court should handle the charges together and divert both if the standard eligibility elements are met, the charges are not traffic offenses, and both charges are in one citation.

In support of our position, CCP Art 45.310, in part, says, “If a charge involving a child who is eligible for diversion is filed,” and CCP Art. 45.301 defines “charge” as “a formal or informal allegation of an offense, including a citation, written promise to appear, complaint, or pending complaint.”

Thus, if two alleged offenses are contained in one citation, that meets the definition of “charge” in CCP 45.310, and the court may divert both charges in one agreement.

We also recommend speaking to the other JPs in your county to see if you can all come to an agreement on how this situation will be handled in your county.  This would help ensure fairness and predictability for juveniles in your area. 

Caselaw Updates

Staley v. State

No. 02-23-00053-CR, Issued 3/6/25 from the Second Court of Appeals in Fort Worth

Question: Is a search warrant affidavit that only relies on the officer’s “training and experience” and no other specific facts in support enough to search electronic devices found in a home where the search warrant is executed.

Holding: No. There was no connection established between the crime being investigated and the defendant’s electronic devices. 

What does this mean for justices of the peace who sign search warrants? This case is a good reminder that the affidavit must go beyond just boilerplate language and include articulable facts connecting the items being searched for with evidence of the crime being investigated. This case is in line with the Baldwin case from the Court of Criminal appeals

Spots filling fast! (Judges Only)

There are still spots open for justices of the peace at the annual Impaired Driving Symposium held July 30-31 in Denton.

Visit the TAC website for more information and to register: https://www.county.org/education-and-events/calendar-of-events/2025/impaired-driving-symposium/overview

Upcoming TJCTC Webinars

Law & Literature Webinar

April 10th from 2:00 – 3:00 pm

Do you want to get paid to be part of a book club?  Join TJCTC’s webinar to discuss the book “Maid” that intersects the art of storytelling and the legal field.

Judge Brad Cummings from Hopkins County and TJCTC Attorney John Lackey will lead the discussion regarding the book.  Also, feel free to watch the Netflix series based on the book and be ready share your thoughts!

Register for the webinar: https://txstate.zoom.us/webinar/register/WN_Er9LPQhaTl2jltrLKgyicQ#/registration

Clearing Your Docket While Helping Your Community: An Update

June 5th from 2:00 – 4:00 pm

This webinar will be an overview of strategies to clear criminal case dockets while ensuring that indigent defendants’ rights are protected.

It will include information about Omnibase holds, waiver of fines and fees, community service plans, other indigent assistance strategies, and include relevant legislative updates

Register for the webinar: https://txstate.zoom.us/webinar/register/WN_spcexLIFROSVykhcZrpsZg#/registration

Rescheduled TAC Training

Judicial Forum on Mental Health (Judges Only)

The Judicial Forum on Mental Health will give county judges and justices of the peace information about the nature of mental illness in the courts, crucial legislative updates and how to create important partnerships.

August 14, 2025 – August 15, 2025

08:00 AM – 05:00 PM

DoubleTree by Hilton Hotel Austin 6505 N. Interstate 35
Austin, TX 78752

Register for the Judicial Forum: https://www.county.org/education-and-events/calendar-of-events/2025/judicial-forum-on-mental-health/overview

Family Help Link

Texas Law Help has partnered with the various legal aid organizations around Texas to create one form for Texans to use to request legal help and resources when it relates to a legal issue that involves a child’s health, stability, safety, or security.

This is a great resource to have handy to share with your local constituents and anyone who comes into your court seeking help with these issues.

Check out the Family Help Link: https://texaslawhelp.org/family-help-link

TJCTC footer

Spotlight: Juvenile Diversions December 2024

Hello Judges & Court Personnel,

As January is upon us, we wanted to make sure that you have all of the resources related to Juvenile Diversions in one place.  Remember, the new Juvenile Diversion Programs must be up and running by January 1, 2025, including courts providing public access to their Juvenile/Youth Diversion Plans.

You may have already taken a course at a 20-hr program, one of our webinars, or completed the self-paced module and have seen many of these resources before, but note that there are additional resources compiled here.

You will also find an FAQ below with some common questions. 

TJCTC Resources

You can access many resources related to Juvenile Diversion on TJCTC’s website (https://www.tjctc.org/).

Frequently Asked Questions

We receive some questions often, and wanted to include them as a reference guide.

Multiple Charges:

We have several juveniles that had 2 charges filed on them in a single incident. How do we handle this with juvenile Diversion?

This situation is not expressly dealt with in the juvenile criminal diversion statutes.

Therefore, it is ultimately up to the court how they want to handle the citation/charges.  

TJCTC’s position is that the court should handle the charges together and divert both if the standard eligibility elements are met, the charges are not traffic offenses, and both charges are in one citation.

In support of our position, CCP Art 45.310, in part, says, “If a charge involving a child who is eligible for diversion is filed,” and CCP Art. 45.301 defines “charge” as “a formal or informal allegation of an offense, including a citation, written promise to appear, complaint, or pending complaint.”

Thus, if two alleged offenses are contained in one citation, that meets the definition of “charge” in CCP 45.310, and the court may divert both charges in one agreement.

We also recommend speaking to the other JPs in your county to see if you can all come to an agreement on how this situation will be handled in your county.  This would help ensure fairness and predictability for juveniles in your area. 

Fees: 

Can you clarify or help me find where in the statute it states courts have to pay for any outside program assigned during the youth diversion program. CCP Art. 45.312 states there can’t be a fee assessed by the courts other than the $50 fee, but not for any outside program referred to such as drug/alcohol class etc. There are many interpretations made by different courts and would like clarification or your perspective. 

From P. 86 of the Juvenile Deskbook: The court may collect from a child’s parent (not the child) a $50 Local Youth Diversion Administrative Fee to defray the costs of the diversion, but only if the fee is an accepted term in the diversion agreement. Code of Criminal Procedure Art. 45.312(a), (b). Diversion may not be made contingent on payment of a fee. Code of Criminal Procedure Art. 45.312(i). No other costs or fees may be assessed for a diversion. Code of Criminal Procedure Art. 45.312(h). 

Since no other fees may be assessed or required, TJCTC believes that a child cannot be forced to pay for a program as part of a diversion. Options include the court/county using the fund created from the $50 administrative fee, Local Youth Diversion Fund, County Juvenile Delinquency Prevention Fund, or other general court funds to cover the costs of programs and/or entering into agreements with service providers for the programs to be made available to diverted children without cost. (Note, these specific Funds are discussed in the next FAQ). 

  

Juvenile Case Managers and Funding: 

What funding sources are available to help pay the salary or a Juvenile Case Manager/Youth Diversion Coordinator or supplement the salary of a court clerk who will serve in the role part time? 

There are several funds related to Juvenile Diversions and pay for Juvenile Case Managers (JCM) and Youth Diversion Coordinators (YDC). First, it is important that while in practice these position titles are hard to distinguish, many of the statutes do only apply to one or the other.  

A court can designate a YDC, but only a Commissioners Court can designate a JCM. 

First, we have the Administrative $50 fee under CCP Art. 45.312(a) that is the only fee assessed in a Juvenile Diversion. The purpose of this money is “to offset the costs of diversion” and it should be placed in an “account to offset the costs of diversion.” Note, the statute does not require this money to be put in one of the other funds that we discuss later. We believe these funds can be used to fund both the salary of a full-time JCM or YDC and as a supplement to a clerk, but since it isn’t collected until a diversion case comes in, it might be difficult to use this year for this purpose from an accounting perspective. 

Local Youth Diversion Fund (Local Government Code [LGC] 134.156) - this fund is funded by $5 from the Local Consolidated Cost charged as part of court costs. See LGC 134.103. This fund can be used for the salary and benefits of a full-time JCM, but “money in the fund may not be used to supplement the income of an employee whose primary role is not that of a juvenile case manager.” This means that in a county where there a JCM is spending their majority of the time on Juvenile Diversions and Truancy, then their salary could be funded by this fund. This fund won’t be available for a supplement for a JCM or YDC who primarily serves as a clerk. If a court doesn’t have a JCM, but does designate a YDC, they cannot use the Local Youth Diversion Fund to fund that position, even if that person does mostly juvenile work.  

County Juvenile Delinquency Prevention Fund (CCP Art. 102.0171) – This fund is funded by $50 from Graffiti offenses after Jan. 1, 2025, and can be used to “providing funding for youth diversion.” This funding could be used to fund JCMs or YDC, but because justice courts do not start contributing this fee to this fund until 2025, there may or may not be adequate funds for this purpose.  

The Justice Court Assistance and Technology Fund (CCP Art. 102.0173) – One of the allowable uses of this fund is “education, benefits, and salaries for court personnel.” This fund can absolutely be used to fund the salary of a JCM or YDC employed by the court or to supplement a court clerk’s salary who will serve as a JCM or YDC. 

Local Government Code 133.125(c) also allows for counties to apply for funds from the Governor, ” A local governmental entity may request funds from the criminal justice division of the governor’s office for providing youth diversion services. The division may award the requested funds based on the availability of appropriated funds and subject to the application procedure and eligibility requirements specified by division rule.” These funds could be used for the salary or supplemental salary of a person serving as a JCM or YDC. 

  

Expunction of Records:  

When does expunction of records happen in Juvenile Diversions?  

If the child is placed on diversion, then all records of the diversion must be expunged without the requirement of a motion or request, on the child’s 18th birthday pursuant to CCP Art. 45.313, whether or not the juvenile is successful. When a case is expunged, all records must be destroyed, and the existence of the case cannot be made known to anyone for any reason. For more information about juvenile diversion, please see Ch. 3A of TJCTC’s Juvenile Deskbook. 

Note, criminal charges filed, even if dismissed, would not be expunged automatically under this statute (but may be expunged under other statutes depending on the situation). 

  

Tracking Cases: 

We are trying to find a good way to track our cases that will be referred to the Juvenile Diversion Program. If we enter these cases in our case management system (Odyssey) and mark them as “sealed” or “locked” records, would that be sufficient to comply with the statute? I understand that they cannot remain “active cases”, but that way we would still have a way of keeping track of those individuals. 

Using a different case type or something like you have described makes sense. We do not see any major issues with this, as long as the records are handled appropriately under the statute if the juvenile completes the juvenile diversion successfully. 

Remember, diversion cases should only be tracked for the purpose of accounting, for statistical records of diversion strategies, and ultimately reporting successful diversions. They will be confidential and are not actually pending criminal cases (and if they were filed, should be dismissed) while the juvenile is in the diversion process. 

  

Minor Alcohol Cases & Diversion: 

What about MIC, MIP, and DUI? 

Remember, for the purposes of juvenile diversions, we are only talking about juveniles under the age of 17, minors aged 17-21 will not be eligible for this diversion, and will be handled according to standard procedures. 

Starting January 1, 2025, juvenile diversions are available to all offenses in justice court that are not traffic offenses.  The crimes of minor in possession and minor in consumption are not traffic offenses.  Therefore, an eligible child would be entitled to diversion for these alleged offenses.     

Our position is that Driving Under the Influence (DUI) [not Driving While Intoxicated – that is a higher-level case handled in other courts] is not a traffic offense either and would be entitled to diversion. 

Absent an express definition, words and phrases take on their normal meanings. Ultimately, it will be up to the court to decide if they believe that DUI falls into the category of “traffic offenses” or not, as there is no explicit definition. 

This is one way to think about what “traffic offenses” means.  Imagine that a teenager wanted to intern in your court.  You asked her whether she’s had any legal trouble besides traffic offenses.  If she had been caught driving under the influence, would she be lying if she had said “no?” We think she would be.  That’s why we think DUI is not a traffic offense and should be subject to diversion. Additionally, while it doesn’t apply specifically to juvenile diversions, the only definition of “traffic offenses” involves offenses in certain sections of the Transportation Code, and DUI by a Minor is in the Alcoholic Beverages Code. 

  

Intermediate Diversion Outcomes: 

What happens if a juvenile is on an intermediate diversion (handled by the Juvenile Case Manager/Youth Diversion Coordinator)? 

If the child successfully complies with the agreement, the case shall be closed and reported as a successful diversion to the court. Code of Criminal Procedure Art. 45.309(c). If the child fails to comply, the child is referred for a non-adversarial hearing before the court. At this hearing, the court may hear from any person the court finds helpful in determining the best path forward, considering the best interests of the child and long-term safety of the community. Code of Criminal Procedure Art. 45.311(a),(b).  If the court determines that the diversion was unsuccessful, the case may be referred to the prosecutor for a possible criminal filing or sent to the Juvenile Court.

More information about these hearings can be found on pages 85-86 of the Juvenile Deskbook.  

  


Additional Resources