The Waco Tribune Herald has the editorial, "Texas justice closes at 5 p.m."
Sharon Keller, presiding judge of the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, shamed the state by deciding that 20 minutes of her time was more important than a last-minute appeal for a man on death row.
If Keller cannot be removed from her position, she should be disciplined for her outrageous behavior.
Keller, a former Dallas prosecutor, has a reputation as a hard-liner when it comes to upholding convictions.
She outdid herself on Sept. 25 when the U.S. Supreme Court accepted a death penalty appeal challenging the constitutionality of lethal injections, used by Texas and other states.
John Moritz has, "Lawmaker says judge mishandled last-ditch appeal," in the Fort Worth-Star-Telegram.
State Rep. Lon Burnam said Tuesday that the presiding judge of Texas' highest criminal court should face disciplinary procedures that include being removed from office for closing the court to an eleventh-hour appeal from Death Row that could have prevented an execution pending a U.S. Supreme Court review of lethal injection.
Burnam, a Fort Worth Democrat, called the action last month by Judge Sharon Keller "unprofessional and unethical" and said it undermined the integrity of the Texas court system.
"I think it was horribly egregious and a gross miscarriage of justice," Burnam said one day after lodging a formal complaint with the State Commission on Judicial Conduct and asking the agency to investigate Keller's actions. "Her job is to uphold the law, and she failed in that responsibility."
In the Houston Chronicle, R.G. Ratcliffe has, "Views divided on judge in dispute over executed man."
Since joining the court, she has developed a reputation for rulings that speeded executions.
• Keller was in the court majority that allowed the 2003 execution of Leonard Rojas to go forward despite a showing that his lawyer had just two years of experience, had his law license suspended three times and had missed a deadline for federal appeals because of bipolar disorder.
Three judges wrote a dissenting opinion, saying: "A capital murder habeas proceeding is no place for a green attorney with multiple suspensions from the State Bar."Keller responded by saying the lawyer only needed to be competent when appointed. She said the fact the Bar had probated the lawyer's suspensions showed that the Bar "still found counsel to be competent to practice law."
In wording that echoes Keller's actions in the Richard case, she complained that Rojas' complaints of incompetent counsel "were not brought to this court's attention until mere days before applicant's scheduled execution."
• Prior to the Richard execution, the biggest controversy of her tenure on the court came when Keller wrote an opinion saying DNA evidence did not prove convicted rapist Roy Criner was innocent even though the semen in his alleged victim was not his. Keller said Criner could have worn a condom during the rape, a theory that was not raised by the prosecution in his trial.
On the PBS program Frontline, Keller was asked how Criner could prove his innocence. She replied: "I don't know."Fellow appeals court Judge Tom Price told Texas Lawyer that Keller had turned the court into a "national laughingstock." Price ran against Keller in 2000 and 2006, losing both times. He did not respond to a request for an interview.
Further DNA testing proved saliva on a cigarette butt at the scene of Criner's alleged rape belonged to another man, whose DNA also matched the semen. Criner received a pardon from then-Gov. George W. Bush in 2000.
• In 1996, Keller wrote an opinion that death row inmate Cesar Fierro received a fair trial despite the fact his confession was coerced by threats that Mexican police would torture his parents. After learning of the coerced confession, the prosecutor and judge in the case called for Fierro to receive a new trial.
"We conclude that the applicant's due process rights were violated," Keller wrote for the court. "But, because we conclude that the error was harmless, we deny relief."Keller, writing for the court majority, said Fierro could have been convicted on a co-defendant's testimony alone.
Earlier coverage of the controversy and ethics complaint is here, here, and here
Comments