While it may never become law, this bill passed the House, so maybe it is an appropriate time to ask what would new art. 38.01, CCP mean or change? Evid. Rule 101 (d)(1)(A) and 104(a) say in determining the admissibility of evidence the rules of evidence outside article V do not apply. Even so defense attorneys routinely make objections to evidence presented at suppression hearings, particularly under articles VII, VIII, and IX. I have often seen courts sustain such objections (even though hearsay, for example, can clearly form the basis for a finding of probable cause and should be considered as an operative fact at the hearing). Will this bill change current practice? Will it somehow prohibit an officer from relating a statement he received from another that he utilized in determining whether to make an arrest or search? Seems to me these hearings could easily become more lengthy and difficult for prosecutors if they are conducted as mini trials.