"Later today, Keller’s lawyers are expected to file a separate appeal challenging the “public warning” given by the State Commission on Judicial Conduct. That appeal will ask Supreme Court Chief Justice Wallace Jefferson to name, by random drawing, three appeals court justices to review whether the warning was justified."......
"The Supreme Court did not elaborate or give reasons for its 8-0 ruling. Justice Nathan Hecht, who successfully challenged a public rebuke by the commission in 2006, did not participate.
Keller had argued that the Texas Constitution does not permit the commission to issue a public warning. She had asked the Supreme Court to throw out the rebuke and dismiss all charges against her.
The 13-member commission had concluded that Keller failed to properly perform her duties in 2007 when she closed the Court of Criminal Appeals clerk’s office at 5 p.m. despite knowing that defense lawyers wanted to file an appeal in a pending execution. Michael Richard, who raped and murdered Marguerite Dixon of Hockley in 1986, was executed later that night."
REPORTER CHUCK LINDELL: THE STATESMAN;
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BACKGROUND: Justice Sharon Keller has attained notoriety for allegations that she allowed convicted murderer and rapist Michael Richard to be executed on September 25, 2007 - notwithstanding his attempt to file a stay of execution - because the court clerk's office closes at 5. Keller is of particular interest blog because of the opinion she wrote for the majority in the Roy Criner case. Wikipedia informs us that: "Sharon Faye Keller (born in Dallas, Texas, 1953) is the Presiding Judge of the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, which is the highest court for all criminal matters in the State of Texas. Because of her position, she has been involved in many high-profile and controversial cases, and has thus received widespread news coverage......In 1998, Keller she wrote the majority opinion in a 5-3 (one judge abstaining) decision that denied a new trial to Roy Criner. Criner had been convicted of sexual assault in 1990, but newly-available DNA testing had shown that the semen found in the victim was not his......Judge Tom Price, who ran for the Chief Judge seat, in a primary election, said that Keller's Criner opinion had made the court a "national laughingstock." Judge Mansfield, who had sided with the majority in denying Criner a hearing, told the Chicago Tribune that, after watching the Frontline documentary, reviewing briefs and considering the case at some length, he voted "the wrong way" and would change his vote if he could. "Judges, like anyone else, can make mistakes ... I hope I get a chance to fix it." He stated that he hoped Criner's lawyers filed a new appeal as he felt Criner deserved a get a new trial......Following the (appeal court's) refusal to order a new trial, the cigarette butt found at the scene (and not adduced at trial) was subjected to DNA testing.The DNA on the cigarette was not a match for Criner, but it was a match for the semen found in Ogg. Ogg's DNA was also found on the cigarette, indicating that she shared a cigarette with the person who had sex with her (and who presumably killed her). These results convinced the district attorney, local sheriff and the trial judge that Criner was not guilty. The Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles recommended he be pardoned and, citing "credible new evidence [that] raises substantial doubt about [Criner's] guilt," then-Governor George W. Bush pardoned him in 2000.
The thorough, unabridged Wikipedia article on Keller can be found at:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sharon_Keller
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"The Texas Supreme Court this morning denied Judge Sharon Keller’s request to throw out last month’s public rebuke for her role in a botched 2007 death row appeal," the Statesman story by reporter Chuck Lindell published earlier today under the heading, "Supreme Court denies Keller appeal," begins.
"Later today, Keller’s lawyers are expected to file a separate appeal challenging the “public warning” given by the State Commission on Judicial Conduct. That appeal will ask Supreme Court Chief Justice Wallace Jefferson to name, by random drawing, three appeals court justices to review whether the warning was justified," the story continues.
"Today is the deadline for requesting the three-judge panel, which apparently would hold its own hearing — with witnesses, cross-examination and exhibits. (I wrote about the confusion regarding this appellate process last month.)
The Supreme Court did not elaborate or give reasons for its 8-0 ruling. Justice Nathan Hecht, who successfully challenged a public rebuke by the commission in 2006, did not participate.
Keller had argued that the Texas Constitution does not permit the commission to issue a public warning. She had asked the Supreme Court to throw out the rebuke and dismiss all charges against her.
The 13-member commission had concluded that Keller failed to properly perform her duties in 2007 when she closed the Court of Criminal Appeals clerk’s office at 5 p.m. despite knowing that defense lawyers wanted to file an appeal in a pending execution. Michael Richard, who raped and murdered Marguerite Dixon of Hockley in 1986, was executed later that night.
Keller refutes the commission’s conclusion, saying defense lawyers were to blame for the missed appeal because they failed to diligently work on Richard’s petitions and did not pursue every available avenue to file his appeal after 5 p.m."
The story can be found at:
http://www.statesman.com/blogs/content/shared-gen/blogs/austin/investigative/entries/2010/08/16/supreme_court_denies_keller_ap.html?cxntfid=blogs_focal_point
PUBLISHER'S NOTE: The Toronto Star, my previous employer for more than twenty incredible years, has put considerable effort into exposing the harm caused by Dr. Charles Smith and his protectors - and into pushing for reform of Ontario's forensic pediatric pathology system. The Star has a "topic" section which focuses on recent stories related to Dr. Charles Smith. It can be accessed at:
http://www.thestar.com/topic/charlessmith
For a breakdown of some of the cases, issues and controversies this Blog is currently following, please turn to:
http://smithforensic.blogspot.com/2010/08/new-feature-cases-issues-and_15.html
Harold Levy: Publisher; The Charles Smith Blog; hlevy15@gmail.com;
