TITLE 1. ADMINISTRATION

PART 8. TEXAS JUDICIAL COUNCIL

CHAPTER 171. REPORTING REQUIREMENTS

The Texas Judicial Council (Council) adopts new rule §171.12 regarding new reporting requirements for prosecuting attorneys imposed by Texas Government Code Sec. 71.0354 with changes to the text as published in the July 10, 2026 issue of the Texas Register (51 TexReg 28). The rule will be republished.

Background and Justification for Rule Adoption. The new rule implements Texas Government Code Sec. 71.0354, which requires county attorneys, district attorneys, and criminal district attorneys who represent the state in criminal matters before the district or other courts in the county (prosecuting attorneys) to report to the Office of Court Administration (OCA), in the form and manner prescribed by the Council, information on: (1) the categories of criminal offenses prosecuted by the prosecuting attorney and the number of criminal cases in each category; (2) the number of personnel employed by the prosecuting attorney and whether that number is sufficient to support the prosecutor's caseload; (3) the number of times a defendant was released as provided by Article 17.151, Code of Criminal Procedure; and (4) the number of electronic notices submitted by the prosecuting attorney to a court as required by Article 17.027(a)(2), Code of Criminal Procedure. Based on the comments received, the proposed rule was modified at adoption.

Comments. Pursuant to Texas Government Code Sec. 2001.029, the Council gave all interested persons a reasonable opportunity to provide written comments concerning the adoption of these rules.

The Council received 15 comments during the public comment period from district attorneys, assistant district attorneys, and/or county attorneys in the following counties: Kerr; Gillespie; Rusk; Hunt; Young; Stephens; Hill; Kleberg; Kenedy; Williamson; Lamb, Wood, Dallas, San Augustine, Travis, Comal, and Atascosa. The following is a summary and discussion by topic of the issues raised by the commenters, the Council's response, and the modifications made to the proposed rule.

Administrative Burden and Cost to Comply with the Rule and General Concerns with the Reporting Requirements

Comments: Several commenters were concerned about the administrative burden imposed on prosecutors' offices (especially in smaller counties) to comply with the new reporting requirements due to understaffing and inadequate funding for new case management systems or case management system changes needed to track and report the information required by the new rule because existing case management systems cannot generate the required reports or capture relevant information. Other concerns expressed by several prosecutors are: 1) the requested information is not needed by the Council; 2) complying with the rule would expend resources that are already in short supply; 3) collection of data and reporting would have to be done manually as they do not have a system to collect the required information; 4) the rule violates the separation of powers doctrine; 5) the information sought is already reported to OCA; 6) the information should be reported by courts and court clerks not prosectors; and 7) the information to be reported is often subjective which will result in inconsistent reporting.

Response: The Council is mindful that the additional reporting required by the rule may result in additional work and possible increased costs as a result of changes to case management systems that may be required and resources needed to compile and submit the information. However, the reporting is mandated by Tex. Government Code Sec. 71.0354 and the rules are necessary to implement these statutory requirements.

Objections to Reporting Case Information for Each Offense Prosecuted (Proposed §171.12(b)(1))

Comments: One commenter suggested that the requirement that data be reported on the number of "criminal offenses" in various "criminal cases" prosecuted was confusing because it is not a metric required in Sec. 71.0354. The commenter suggested that the information be reported by the number of cases filed in each category and not information regarding each offense prosecuted in each case. One commenter suggested that reporting at the offense level would be difficult to collect while another commenter suggested that it is data that can be easily collected and reported. Another commenter suggested that the number of offense counts be collected for each category of criminal offense.

Response: Tex. Government Code Sec. 71.0354 requires data be reported on "the categories of criminal offenses prosecuted by the prosecuting attorney and the number of criminal cases in each category." The term "criminal case" is not defined and the method of filing a criminal case is not consistent throughout the state. Some prosecutors file "cases" for each offense while others file one case with several offenses and still others file one case for each count. In order to fully capture the workload of a prosecutor's office, the Council maintains that reporting by offense will result in the most accurate data and is consistent with the requirement and intent of Tex. Government Code Sec. 71.0354.

Objection to Reporting Information Regarding Prosecution of Class C Misdemeanors (Proposed §171.12(b)(1)(H)

Comments: A commenter questioned whether the reporting requirements should include tracking class C misdemeanors, which his office does not file but may prosecute. Another commenter noted that thousands of class C misdemeanors are filed with Justices of the Peace annually, but they do not prosecute the majority of them. And another commenter indicated that they do not have access to information regarding the majority of class C misdemeanors which are prosecuted by the city attorney, a prosecutor type that is not subject to the rule.

Response: The Council has considered the comments noting that, unlike the other category of offenses, district and county prosecutors do not file most class C misdemeanors and that the majority of these offenses, approximately 68% in FY25, are prosecuted by a city attorney. Because of the additional cost and staff time required to collect this information and its limited value in capturing a district or county prosecutor's workload, the Council believes the benefit to be gained from collecting this information does not outweigh the cost and effort required to comply with this reporting requirement. Therefore, the Council has deleted §171.12(b)(1)(H) from the rule. The Council has also deleted the term "complaint" from the definition of "criminal case" as complaints are generally used for class C misdemeanors.

Objection to Reporting Information Regarding the Number of Persons Released under Tex. Code of Criminal Procedure Art. 17.151 and the Number of Art. 17.151 Writs Received by Prosecutors (Proposed §171.12(b)(3) and (4))

Comments: Several prosecutors questioned the need and validity of reporting information regarding the number of persons released under Art. 17.151 and the number of Art. 17.151 writs received by prosecutors. One prosecutor stated that reporting requirements regarding the number of times a defendant was released pursuant to Art. 17.151 would be burdensome to determine because it would require manual tracking, as it is not currently captured by his county's case management systems. He further stated that, in the majority of cases, an individual is released under Art. 17.151 prior to the case being filed in his office. As it concerns writs, the prosecutor stated that the information required in §171.12(b)(4) cannot be tracked by his county's case management system and would require the manual entry of data. Another commenter noted that collecting data of the number of persons released under Art. 17.151 does not provide particularly useful information regarding the workload of the office of prosecuting attorneys because, in the majority of situations, a person will be released under Art. 17.151 before their case has been sent to the prosecutor's office for consideration. The commenter continued that, in their jurisdiction, prosecutors do not have much control over who is released under Art. 17.151 because the office has not received sufficient details on the case in order to present it to a grand jury. One commenter questioned whether the information would be useful to the Council because, in the majority of cases, a writ or motion under Art. 17.151 is not filed with the court until an individual has been released from detention. Another prosecutor expressed concern about the requirement to report cases over 90 days because of the difficulty in determining when a district attorney's office receives a complete case. He also stated that reporting a case filed after 60 days, which may not have been presented to a grand jury, is problematic. Several prosecutors stated that tracking the number of Art. 17.151 habeas applications would be better reported by district courts, law enforcement custodial agencies, and clerks. Another prosecutor noted that in counties that do not directly file a case at the time of arrest, the prosecuting attorney's office does not control when a criminal case is submitted by the arresting law enforcement agency.

Response: The Council is mindful of the issues raised regarding the data required by §171.12(b)(3) (the number of times a person was released under Art. 17.151), but Tex. Government Code Sec. 71.0354(b)(3) specifically requires this information be collected from prosecutors. However, because the proposed rule will be amended to delete the requirement that class C misdemeanor information be collected, the Council has also removed the requirement that data be submitted regarding the number of times a person charged with a misdemeanor punishable by a fine only was released under Art. 17.151. Additionally, as the information to be collected under proposed §171.12(b)(4) (number of Art. 17.151 writs received by the prosecutor) is not specifically required by statute and the benefit to be gained from collecting this information does not outweigh the cost and effort required to comply with this reporting requirement, this provision also has been deleted from the rule.

Clarification Regarding Certain Reporting Requirements

Comments: One commenter requested a clearer definition of "offenses" in §171.12(b)(1) and "personnel employed" used in §171.12(b)(2). The commenter also requested implementation guidance. Other commenters raised questions regarding the method of reporting and clarification on procedures. One commenter also requested that the rule permit corrections to submitted reports.

Response: The Council has instructed the Office of Court Administration to provide reporting instructions for the submission of the information required by the new rule. Additionally, prosecutors will have the ability to submit corrected reports.

Ability to Uniformly Report Whether Staffing Levels are Appropriate

Comments: Several commenters expressed concerns regarding the requirement to report whether the number of staff is sufficient to support the prosecutor's caseload. The position of several commenters is that determining whether an office is adequately staffed is a subjective measure that will result in inconsistent reporting. One commenter noted that it is not possible to objectively determine whether their staffing levels are adequate as there is no validated workload standard for prosecutors' offices. Another prosecutor indicated that for those offices with civil duties in addition to prosecutor duties, it would not be possible to gauge whether staffing levels are sufficient for prosecuting purposes when other duties are taken into consideration.

Response: The Council understands that some of the information provided by the prosecutors regarding whether the number of staff is sufficient to support the prosecutor's caseload is subjective and may result in inconsistent reporting. The Council is aware that there is no tool that can be used by all prosecutors to determine if their offices are adequately staffed and that the information provided by prosecutors may not be consistent. However, this information is specifically required to be reported by Tex. Government Code Sec. 71.0354. The Office of Court Administration in its reporting instructions will provide guidelines so that certain staffing information will be reported consistently across the board.

Request to Delay Implementation

Comments: One commenter requested that the Council consider delaying implementation so that the prosecutor could have additional time to acquire software that would be necessary for tracking the information that must be reported. Another prosecutor noted that the law does not require reporting to commence on September 1, 2026, it only requires that the Council prescribe the information, and form and manner of submission of information required by Tex. Government Code Sec. 71.0354.

Response: Because prosecutors have not been required to report this information in the past and several prosecutors have expressed concern regarding the increased work and processes that will need to be deployed to start collecting the required information, the Council will delay implementation of the rule to December 1, 2026, with the first reports due to the Council in March of 2027.

Including Complaints in the Definition of a Criminal Case

Comment: One prosecutor commented that the definition of "criminal case" would provide inconsistent reporting between jurisdictions that use direct file and those that do not. The commenter suggested amending the definition of "criminal case."

Response: The Council is removing the term "complaint" from the definition of "criminal case." This will result in consistent reporting of information and indictments irrespective of whether the county employs the practice of direct file.

Statutory Authority and Sections Affected. The proposed rules are adopted pursuant to Texas Government Code Sec. 71.019, the Council's general rulemaking authority. The adopted rules implement the reporting requirements imposed by Texas Government Code Sec. 71.0354.

Cross Reference to Statute. The new rule implements Texas Government Code Sec. 71.0354.

§171.12. Prosecuting Attorney Information.

(a) In this rule:

(1) "criminal case" means a case in which a criminal indictment or information has been filed in a district or other court in the county;

(2) "OCA" means the Office of Court Administration; and

(3) "prosecuting attorney" has the meaning assigned in §71.0354(a) of the Government Code.

(b) Pursuant to §71.0354 (b) of the Government Code, each prosecuting attorney shall report the following information to OCA:

(1) the number of offenses in each criminal case filed in each county served by the prosecuting attorney in each of the following categories:

(A) capital felony;

(B) 1st degree felony;

(D) 3rd degree felony;

(E) state jail felony;

(F) class A misdemeanor; and

(G) class B misdemeanor.

(2) on an annual basis, the number of personnel employed by the prosecuting attorney and whether that number is sufficient to support the prosecutor's caseload; and

(3) the number of times a defendant was released pursuant to Code of Criminal Procedure Article 17.151 §1 (1 - 3), regardless of whether an application for a writ of habeas corpus was filed, in each county served by the prosecuting attorney.

(c) Unless otherwise stated, prosecuting attorneys must submit the information required to be reported under this rule on a quarterly basis in the manner required by OCA. Reports are due to OCA no later than the last day of the month following the end of the reporting period.

(d) Comments:

(1) The first quarterly reporting period under this rule is from December 1, 2026 through February 28, 2027. The first quarterly report (under §171.12(b) (1) and (3)) and annual report (under §171.12(b)(2)) are due on March 31, 2027.

(2) Prosecuting attorneys are not required to submit electronic notices to a court under Article 17.027(a)(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure; therefore, no information will be collected from prosecuting attorneys regarding the activity described by §71.0354(b)(4) of the Government Code.

The agency certifies that legal counsel has reviewed the adoption and found it to be a valid exercise of the agency's legal authority.

Filed with the Office of the Secretary of State on September 1, 2026.

TRD-202603794

Maria Roman

General Counsel

Texas Judicial Council

Effective date: September 21, 2026

Proposal publication date: July 10, 2026

For further information, please call: (512) 463-1682