AUSTIN, Texas — The Texas Supreme Court on Friday halted a legislative subpoena after Republican and Democratic lawmakers used a novel ploy to halt Robert Roberson’s lethal injection at the last minute. The court ruled that it could not be used.
The ruling addressed a subpoena issued to Roberson last month by the Texas House Criminal Justice Committee that was seen as a way to delay his execution.
However, the High Court ruled that “under these circumstances, the commission’s power to compel testimony does not include the power to override the legal proceedings that would have led to the execution.” wrote Republican Justice Evan Young in the court’s opinion.
Mr. Roberson was scheduled to die by lethal injection on October 17, but in a last-ditch effort, lawmakers issued a subpoena to have him testify at the Texas Capitol several days after his scheduled execution.
A new execution date for Mr. Roberson has not been set, but unless Gov. Greg Abbott grants a 30-day reprieve, it is certain that his execution will be brought forward.
This created a legal quandary between the state’s criminal and civil courts, and ultimately led to the Texas Supreme Court temporarily ruling in Roberson’s favor.
Roberson was sentenced to death in 2003 for the murder of his 2-year-old daughter, Nikki Curtis. He has bipartisan support from lawmakers and medical experts who say he was convicted on false evidence of “shaken baby syndrome.” Shaken syndrome refers to severe brain injuries that occur when a child’s head is injured by a violent impact, such as being shaken or slammed. Push it against the wall or throw it on the floor.
Roberson will be the first person in the United States to be executed for killing a child in this manner.
Rep. Joe Moody, who has been leading the effort to stop Roberson from being executed, said it was “never our specific intention” to delay the execution through subpoenas, and that the subpoenas and lawsuit should stand. , the court added, “with due consent.”
Moody said the court’s decision “reinforces our belief that the committee will indeed have access to Mr. Roberson’s testimony and makes clear that we expect the executive branch of the government to respond to us in doing so.” “There was still a possibility that Mr. Roberson could be called to testify.”
Prosecutors said Roberson violently shook his daughter back and forth, killing her. Roberson’s lawyers argued that the child’s symptoms were not consistent with child abuse and that he likely died from complications of severe pneumonia.
His lawsuit has the support of nearly 90 bipartisan legislators and civil rights activists who all agree that Mr. Roberson is innocent and did not receive a fair trial under the state’s “junk science law.” He claims that there is no. The law allows people convicted of crimes under outdated science to have their sentences vacated. While the 2013 law was hailed as progressive and the first of its kind, civil rights activists said the state’s highest criminal court would not allow the law to apply to people facing the death penalty. They claim that they are not using it properly.
The Supreme Court, which deals with civil matters, has made clear that it is not basing its decision on the merits or evidence of whether Roberson is guilty or not guilty of capital murder. The Supreme Court said those questions remain in the criminal courts, which have so far rejected Robinson’s appeals.
