HBA-KMH H.B. 2190 76(R) BILL ANALYSIS Office of House Bill AnalysisH.B. 2190 By: Hinojosa Criminal Jurisprudence 3/22/1999 Introduced BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE Presumptive evidence, as defined by Black's Law Dictionary, is evidence which must be received and treated as true and sufficient until and unless rebutted by other evidence. Currently, in order to prosecute a person for failing to subsequently deliver a check or sight order as promised after delivery of a good or service, the prosecutor is required to provide some proof that the person who promised payment never intended to pay for the property. H.B. 2190 places the burden of proof on the person who received the goods or services to show that the person intended to make the promised payment, if payment was not received within seven days of delivery. RULEMAKING AUTHORITY It is the opinion of the Office of House Bill Analysis that this bill does not expressly delegate any additional rulemaking authority to a state officer, department, agency, or institution. SECTION BY SECTION ANALYSIS SECTION 1. Amends Section 31.06, Penal Code, by adding Subsection (g), as follows: (g) Provides an additional presumption to the offense of theft that if the actor obtains property by promising the delivery of a check or similar sight order for the payment of money, the actor's failure to deliver the check or order not later than the seventh day after the date the actor obtained the property is prima facie evidence of the actor's intent to deprive the owner of property under Section 31.03 (Theft), Penal Code. SECTION 2. Makes application of this Act prospective. SECTION 3. Effective date: September 1, 1999. SECTION 4. Emergency clause.