Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Pretrial Conditions Monitoring topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Judge Boyd orders SCRAM monitoring, bans driving and requires ignition interlock on accessible vehicles
Summary
Presiding Judge Stephanie Boyd ordered SCRAM alcohol monitoring and a prohibition on driving, and directed ignition interlock on accessible vehicles for a defendant appearing in the 187th District Court; the court set a four-month return for review and said any request to remove conditions must be filed as a motion.
Presiding Judge Stephanie Boyd of the 187th District Court ordered SCRAM alcohol monitoring, continued a prohibition on driving and required ignition interlock on all vehicles accessible to the defendant during a hearing on pretrial and probation conditions. The court set a four-month follow-up to review compliance and said any party seeking to remove SCRAM or lift the no-driving restriction must file a motion.
The order grew out of confusion about whether an ignition interlock was currently installed. Defense counsel and probation each described prior interlock activity and monitoring. Judge Boyd said on the record, “I'm gonna order then SCRAM, and there's to be no driving.” She added procedural direction: “If she wants to drive, then you all will need to come back here and file a motion and ask the court to consider her to drive. If you all want SCRAM removed, you have to come back here, file a motion, and we can hear whether or not SCRAM should be removed.”
Probation indicated the defendant has prior conditions from another county (Bexar County) and described monitoring that had been in place earlier; defense counsel said the client had been working remotely and that family members helped with transportation. On the record, the court also instructed probation to prepare the order reflecting SCRAM monitoring and the no-driving requirement.
Judge Boyd scheduled a status check in roughly four months to evaluate whether the monitoring and other conditions should be adjusted. The court emphasized that any change — including removal of SCRAM or approval to drive — requires a formal motion and a return to court for consideration.
