2025 Texas sessionsRegular and both called sessions have ended. This index covers House and Senate bills, not resolutions. Statuses come from official reports.

← Back to bills

2025 · Regular session · House bill

HB2854

The Pokuaa-Flowers Act requires advance parole-officer approval for certain non-treatment visits to general hospitals.

Read bill highlights ↓

Official caption: Relating to the required approval of certain hospital visits as a condition of release on parole or to mandatory supervision for certain releasees and to the hospital's liability for damages resulting from those visits.

Signed by governorSource-checked explanation published

Official report lists House author(s): Anchía, Rose, Phelan, Cook, Buckley. This does not identify sponsors or amendment drafters.

Report an error ↗

Bill explanation published · Version and amendment review scope is stated below · Individual amendment records may not be separately annotated.

Bill highlights

Selected points from the published explanation. Follow each point to its source-linked context; conditions and limits may matter.

Read the full explanation ↓

What does it do?

The Pokuaa-Flowers Act requires advance parole-officer approval for certain non-treatment visits to general hospitals. It applies when a parole panel places someone on electronic monitoring and that person is serving a sentence for an offense listed in Code of Criminal Procedure Article 42A.054(a), or has the specified deadly-weapon/firearm finding in the judgment. It is not a blanket rule for everyone on parole, every person with a criminal record or every hospital visitor. Final law, Sections 1–4; offense list and findings.

For covered people, the parole panel must make prior approval a condition of parole or mandatory supervision. A request must give the intended visit’s date, time and reason. Visits to receive medical treatment—including emergency care—are excepted from this new prior-approval requirement. The incorporated treatment definition also includes physical or mental health treatment and preventive care. The law uses the statutory definition of a general hospital, not every clinic or health facility. It does not waive unrelated release conditions. Treatment definition; general-hospital definition.

If a parole officer approves a visit, the officer must promptly notify the hospital’s chief law-enforcement officer—or a local law-enforcement agency if the hospital employs no peace officers—of its date and time. The Department of State Health Services must maintain a contact database, including telephone numbers and email addresses, and provide an updated version annually to the Texas Department of Criminal Justice (TDCJ).

The act also limits liability. TDCJ is not liable for damages resulting from a covered releasee’s visit if the approving parole officer attempted the required notification using the database’s contact information; the condition does not require proof that the notice was received. A general hospital receives protection from damages resulting from such a visit, except for gross negligence, recklessness or intentional misconduct. The hospital protection cannot be used to limit a claim under Civil Practice and Remedies Code Chapter 74, which governs health-care liability claims. It is not blanket immunity for every hospital injury. Chapter 74 definitions.

The act took effect September 1, 2025, and applies only to people released on parole or mandatory supervision on or after that date. Earlier releases remain governed by the former law. The governor signed the bill June 20, 2025. Official history.

What changed along the way?

The filed bill already contained the targeted visit-approval requirement and a broader hospital-liability shield. The House substitute added the gross-negligence, recklessness and intentional-misconduct exceptions and preserved Chapter 74 claims. Those protections survived in the final law; the House-passed text and Senate committee text were substantively the same.

Huffman’s adopted Senate floor amendment added the health-department contact database, its annual delivery to TDCJ, use of those contacts for notification, and TDCJ’s protection when the officer attempts notification. This was the sole amendment listed in the official index. The House concurred May 30, and all of these additions appear in the enrolled act.

For the full amendment record, open the official amendment index.

Official bill versions

Compare the published text versions in the official text index. A change is not attributed to a specific amendment here without a verified record.

Who could benefit—and who could bear the costs?

Hospital staff, patients and law-enforcement officers could benefit from advance notice of covered visits. Covered releasees face an added approval step for visits such as seeing another patient, but the new rule does not require prior approval to obtain their own medical treatment. Parole officers and the health department bear notification and database work.

Hospitals and TDCJ gain specified liability protections; people harmed during covered visits may face narrower recovery options, subject to the express exceptions and preserved health-care claims. These are legal changes and possible practical effects, not evidence that the act has prevented violence.

The latest fiscal note anticipates no significant state or local fiscal effect, assuming implementation costs can be absorbed within existing resources. It does not say there is no administrative work, assign a dollar value to avoided incidents or establish compensation for injured people.

Official sources

Catalog report retrieved 2026-10-25. Check the official record for corrections or later changes.