Chuck Lindell, who broke the story on turmoil in the CCA has over Judge Keller decision to close the Court's door to a late appeal, has, "Ethics complaint filed against Texas appeals judge," in today's Austin American-Statesman.
Nineteen Texas lawyers filed an ethics complaint Wednesday claiming that Sharon Keller, presiding judge of the state's highest criminal court, has discredited the judiciary and subjected Texas to worldwide ridicule.
Keller, the lawyers argue, should be removed from office or otherwise disciplined for refusing to accept an after-hours appeal from death row inmate Michael Richard on Sept. 25. They say Keller's actions violated her legal obligations and deprived Richard of his constitutional right to court access. Richard was executed that night.
"The whole scenario is shocking and unconscionable," said Jim Harrington, director of the Texas Civil Rights Project and one of the lawyers filing the complaint.
Richard's lawyers had asked the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals to stay open 20 to 30 minutes past 5 p.m. to accept an appeal based on that morning's news that the U.S. Supreme Court would determine whether lethal injections violate the U.S. Constitution's ban on cruel and unusual punishment. Defense lawyers said computer problems had delayed their filing.
Keller refused without consulting or alerting others on the nine-member court, including at least three judges who were working late in case of a last-minute appeal. Her decision made headlines around the world and drew rare public criticism from several judges, who typically don't discuss the Austin-based court's internal workings.
By not accepting the late filing, the Texas court did not allow Richard access to the U.S. Supreme Court, which could have stayed his execution. Two days later, the Supreme Court blocked the execution of another Texas inmate whose appeal, similar to Richard's, was filed on time with the Texas court.
Had Keller accepted the after-hours filing — common practice among appeals courts across the nation — Richard would not have been executed, Harrington said.
Keller did not return a phone call seeking comment Wednesday. Previously, Keller said she was merely enforcing the court's longstanding practice of closing at 5 p.m. and had not been told about computer troubles.
The Dallas Morning News carries an AP report, "Attorneys file complaint over court closing before execution."
Lawyers signing the complaint included former State Bar President Broadus Spivey, Houston criminal defense lawyer Dick DeGuerin and Democratic state Rep. Harold Dutton of Houston.
The lawyers are being represented in the complaint by Jim Harrington, director of the Texas Civil Rights Project. Mr. Harrington said Judge Keller's actions were "morally callous, shocking and unconscionable for an appellate judge."
The judicial conduct commission's proceedings are secret. The commission can dismiss a complaint without making it public; publicly reprimand a judge; or recommend to the Texas Supreme Court that the judge be removed from office.
The Fort Worth Star-Telegram carries a slightly different version of the AP report, "Appeals judge faces conduct complaint.
Keller last week voiced no second thoughts about her actions. Instead she suggested that Richard's lawyers should have filed their request on time. She didn't immediately return a phone call to her office from The Associated Press on Wednesday.
Judge Cheryl Johnson was the appeals court jurist in charge of Richard's case. Johnson said her understanding was that in a death penalty case, court officials remain at the office until the time of execution and accept filings until the execution is under way.
The Houston Chronicle has, "Lawyers say judge violated executed man's rights," reported by R.G. Ratcliffe and Polly Ross Hughes.
Keller. a Republican, was not the only state elected official criticized Wednesday in connection with the Richard execution.
Former Gov. Mark White and former Attorney General Jim Mattox, who both fought to enforce the state's capital punishment laws during their terms as attorney general, said Abbott, as the state's top lawyer, has a duty to halt executions when they appear to violate an inmate's due process rights.
White said Abbott is an officer of the court and he "should have been obligated to ask for a stay" in the Richard execution.
Mattox said the attorney general may lack actual legal authority to stop an execution, but the state prison system will follow an attorney general's order.
Mattox, who witnessed more than 30 executions, said he once ordered an inmate off the execution gurney over prison system protests because he knew the man would receive a stay.
"When the state is all powerful, the state has got to be cautious in how it uses its power," he said. "Sometimes you do things not to protect the individual but to protect the system itself."
Mattox and White are Democrats. White served as attorney general from 1979 to 1982, and Mattox from 1983 to 1990.
The San Antonio Express-News carries a slightly abbreviated version of the Chronicle report as, "Judge under fire after execution."
The Texas Civil Rights Project news release is here.
he attorneys include a number of distinguished and accomplished civil attorneys from around the state. The list also includes former State Bar President Broadus Spivey, premier criminal defense attorney Dick Deguerin, Professor and former Dean of University of Houston Law School Mike Olivas, former appellate judge Michol O’Connor, legal ethics expert and author Chuck Herring, Texas State Representative Harold Dutton, Southern Methodist Law School clinical supervisor Eliot Shavin, and former Nueces County Attorney Mike Westergren.
Jim Harrington, Director of the Texas Civil Rights Project, called Judge Keller’s actions “morally callous, shocking, and unconscionable for an appellate judge. What Judge Keller did was not about doing justice, but about taking a short cut to execute someone – an abominable act. This is also a reflection on the entire court – it’s one of the few in the land that does not allow fax or e-filings of emergency petitions like this.”
Harrington also said he would be filing a grievance with the State Bar in the next few days to revoke Judge Keller’s law license, which, if done, would have the effect of removing her from the bench.
Comments