The execution of Robert Roberson, a man convicted for the death of his 2-year-old daughter, was halted by the Texas Supreme Court on Thursday. This decision followed a rare bipartisan intervention from Texas lawmakers and raised significant questions surrounding the use of the shaken baby syndrome diagnosis in criminal cases.
Roberson had been scheduled for lethal injection at a prison in Huntsville on Thursday night. His case has drawn attention because of its reliance on shaken baby syndrome, a diagnosis that has been increasingly scrutinized in recent years. As legal experts and death penalty advocates have noted, the science behind this diagnosis is not as clear-cut as once believed. Lawyers for Roberson have long argued that his daughter, Nikki, died not from abuse but from a respiratory illness exacerbated by medication.
Despite appeals to the U.S. Supreme Court and Texas Governor Greg Abbott, both declined to intervene in the case. Justice Sonia Sotomayor, in a statement, urged Governor Abbott to grant a temporary reprieve. “An executive reprieve of 30 days would provide the Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles with an opportunity to reconsider the evidence of Roberson’s actual innocence,” she wrote. However, no such action was taken by the governor.
The intervention that ultimately delayed Roberson’s execution came from an unexpected source. Members of the Texas House, led by Jeff Leach, a Republican from the Dallas area, and Joe Moody, a Democrat from El Paso, sought a court order to stop the execution and allow Roberson to testify before the Texas Legislature. Their goal was to further investigate the case and review the evidence that may have been overlooked during Roberson’s trial. The Texas Supreme Court issued a stay, effectively delaying the execution until a new date is set.
Contents
Shaken Baby Syndrome and Legal Challenges
Shaken baby syndrome has been a critical factor in numerous convictions over the past several decades, including Roberson’s. The medical condition is typically diagnosed when a child presents with symptoms such as brain swelling, retinal hemorrhages, and subdural bleeding. These symptoms have historically been viewed as clear signs of abuse. However, in recent years, both medical professionals and legal experts have questioned whether these symptoms could result from other causes, such as illness or accident.
The American Academy of Pediatrics still acknowledges shaken baby syndrome as a legitimate diagnosis. However, some doctors and defense attorneys argue that it has been used in cases where there is little other evidence of abuse. This has led to calls for a reevaluation of cases where the diagnosis played a pivotal role in convictions.
Roberson’s legal team, led by attorney Gretchen Sween, has been adamant that no crime was committed. They maintain that Nikki’s death was caused by pneumonia and the medication she had been prescribed. “He lives to fight another day and hopes that his experience can help improve the integrity of our criminal legal system,” Sween said following the Texas Supreme Court’s decision.
Bipartisan Efforts to Delay Execution
The bipartisan group of lawmakers that intervened in Roberson’s case was motivated by concerns over the fairness of the trial and the validity of the medical evidence used to convict him. More than half of the Republican-controlled Texas House has expressed support for a review of Roberson’s case. Even the detective involved in Roberson’s original conviction has since stated that he believes Roberson is innocent.
Leach and Moody, in a joint statement, expressed their gratitude for the court’s intervention, saying, “We look forward to welcoming Robert to the Texas Capitol, and along with 31 million Texans, finally giving him — and the truth — a chance to be heard.”
Despite this temporary reprieve, Roberson’s future remains uncertain. His execution has been delayed before, in 2016, when the Court of Criminal Appeals allowed new medical evidence to be presented. However, the court ultimately upheld his conviction, and his appeals have been consistently denied since.
The Role of Lawmakers and Legal Maneuvers
The intervention by Texas lawmakers to delay Roberson’s execution centered on a procedural issue. A subpoena was issued for Roberson to testify before the Texas Legislature, a move designed to provide more time for reviewing the evidence in the case. This legal maneuver ran out the clock, as the execution could not take place before the midnight deadline, forcing the setting of a new date.
In a hearing conducted via video, Jeff Leach argued that this action fell within the powers granted to the Texas House under the state constitution. However, the Court of Criminal Appeals ruled against the legislators, stating that they had no authority in the matter. The Texas Supreme Court, in turn, disagreed, ruling that the issue was a civil matter and should be decided by the state’s highest civil court. Justice Evan A. Young, in a concurrence joined by two other justices, emphasized that the court’s focus would remain strictly on procedural issues, not the details of Roberson’s case.
The case now returns to the district court in Travis County, where the Texas Attorney General’s office will represent the executive branch against the House members.
The Future of the Roberson Case
The fate of Robert Roberson remains in legal limbo. While the Texas Supreme Court’s decision has temporarily halted his execution, it has not resolved the underlying issues of his conviction. The role of shaken baby syndrome in criminal cases continues to be debated, and Roberson’s case may yet serve as a catalyst for reevaluating its use in the justice system. For now, the battle over his life continues in the courts and the halls of the Texas Legislature.
