Texas’ highest criminal court has recently made headlines as all three conservative candidates supported by Attorney General Ken Paxton emerged victorious over their Democratic opponents, solidifying Republican control over the court. David Schenck, Gina Parker, and Lee Finley, who were endorsed by Paxton, managed to unseat Republican incumbents during the primary, resulting in a significant shift in experience on the bench.
Among the newly elected judges, only Schenck has prior judicial experience, having served on the Fifth District Court of Appeals in Dallas for eight years. Parker, a Waco attorney and owner of a dental equipment company, and Finley, a Collin County criminal attorney and U.S. Marine Corps veteran, are the other new faces on the Texas Supreme Court.
One of the recent high-profile cases before the court involved the execution of Robert Roberson, an East Texas man convicted of killing his 2-year-old daughter in 2002. Despite Roberson’s claims of innocence, the Court of Criminal Appeals has consistently ruled in favor of the state, upholding his death sentence. However, with the departure of three judges who voted against Roberson in the primary, there is a possibility for his case to be reconsidered with the new judges on the bench.
Attorney General Paxton has been actively involved in advocating for Roberson’s execution, releasing evidence from the original trial to support his guilt. Paxton’s aggressive stance has been criticized by some as interference in the justice system, particularly by Texas House members who believe Roberson was denied due process.
The recent election results have been attributed to Paxton’s efforts to reshape the court in his favor following a legal dispute over his office’s authority to prosecute election cases without the local prosecutor’s consent. The Court of Criminal Appeals ruled against Paxton’s unilateral prosecution approach in 2021, prompting him to target judges who opposed his stance on voter fraud.
Despite concerns about the influence of Paxton’s political agenda on the new judges, there is optimism that they may uphold their judicial oath and make impartial decisions. Former Court of Criminal Appeals Judge Elsa Alcala expressed hope that the election outcome could lead to a reassessment of capital punishment cases in Texas, highlighting the need for the court to reconsider its approach to death penalty appeals under a “junk science” law.
Alcala specifically pointed to Chief Judge Sharon Keller as a key figure in the court’s reluctance to reexamine death penalty cases. She emphasized the importance of judicial independence and ethical decision-making, suggesting that the fresh faces on the bench could bring much-needed change to longstanding issues in the Texas criminal justice system.
In conclusion, the recent judicial elections in Texas have raised questions about the future direction of the state’s highest criminal court and its handling of critical legal matters such as capital punishment. While the political dynamics surrounding the court may have shifted, the ultimate impact on cases like Robert Roberson’s remains to be seen as the new judges take office and begin their judicial duties.
