SB1300

Charging papers need not name or describe every stolen item: naming the merchant and, when value sets the offense level, the applicable aggregate value range suffices under the new special rule. The new evidence provision allows evidence of the defendant’s participation in other theft offenses for intent, knowledge or acting together when those issues are raised by a not-guilty plea. An unaltered price tag or marking is prima facie evidence of value; a marking identifying or unique to the merchant is prima facie evidence of ownership. These are specific evidentiary rules, not a declaration that a price tag alone proves every element of guilt. Final law, new articles 21.155 and 38.51; Ordinary property-description rule.

Removing or altering a label, barcode, price tag or theft detector, or moving merchandise into different packaging, creates a presumption of intent to deprive. General Penal Code safeguards require proof beyond a reasonable doubt of the triggering facts and let the jury decline the inference; the state must prove other elements. The act also applies existing theft-law rules for determining unlawful appropriation, including rules concerning property known or represented to be stolen, accomplice evidence and specified knowledge presumptions. Final law, section 31.16(b); Presumption safeguards; Incorporated theft rules, subsections (b)–(c).

The act says it is not a defense that a co-participant was never identified, apprehended, charged or convicted; that police used a deception or undercover operation; or that police supplied a facility or opportunity. Its solicitation provision is limited to inducement that would encourage someone predisposed to offend, but not someone who was not predisposed. It should not be read as saying all police inducement is lawful or every entrapment argument disappears. Final law, section 31.16(c); General entrapment provision.

For Chapter 12 repeat-offender enhancements, the new section counts an organized-retail-theft adjudication of guilt or a guilty/no-contest plea exchanged for deferred-adjudication community supervision as a conviction, regardless of whether a sentence was imposed or the person was later discharged from probation. This is a specific rule for enhancement purposes, not a claim that deferred adjudication becomes a conviction for every legal purpose. Final law, section 31.16(e); Felony enhancement framework; State-jail enhancement framework; Misdemeanor enhancement framework.

The introduced, Senate committee, Senate-passed and House committee substantive texts match. The sole indexed House third-reading amendment, offered by Walle and Cook and adopted May 28, removed the proposed special tier at $300,000 or more with a 15-year minimum prison term and a fine up to $250,000. The final act instead places all values of $150,000 or more in the ordinary first-degree category; the Senate concurred May 30. The removed special minimum and fine are not enacted provisions of SB1300, though separate repeat-offender rules may still apply. Introduced bill; House committee text; Adopted amendment; Five text versions; Amendment index; Final law.

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

Merchants and prosecutors gain a broader offense and charging/evidence tools. People accused of coordinated or repeated theft face lower felony thresholds and added consequences from deferred-adjudication pleas. These changes may affect enforcement and punishment; the act does not establish how much theft will be prevented, how many prosecutions will result or what any individual sentence will be. Final law.

The March 11 introduced and May 28 post-House fiscal notes anticipate no significant state or local fiscal impact, while noting that revenue effects depend on offenses and court costs. Justice and municipal courts were expected to see fewer filings for this offense as its lowest tier moves out of Class C. The enrolled fiscal link repeats the May 28 note. The introduced note’s discussion of a special 15-year minimum describes the earlier proposal, not the final law. Introduced fiscal note; Post-House fiscal note; Enrolled fiscal link.

The final criminal-justice statement says correctional demand could increase but assumes the state impact would not be significant. It reports fiscal-year-2024 activity of 211 arrests, 23 referrals, 64 adult community-supervision placements and no adult or juvenile state-institution admissions for organized retail theft. Those separate historical measures are not projected new cases under SB1300. Neither the fiscal note nor the act provides a quantified merchant savings estimate or a new appropriation. Final criminal-justice statement; Earlier statement; Final law.