SUB—HEADING: :The filings include allegations of judicial misconduct and seek opportunities for further fact-finding."
GIST: "For the third time, Robert Roberson III is scheduled to be executed by lethal injection next month in Texas.
Roberson, 58, was convicted of capital murder in 2003 for reportedly shaking his 2-year-old daughter, Nikki, to death. His prosecution relied on proving Nikki showed a triad of symptoms associated with “shaken baby syndrome,” a medical determination that has since come under wide scrutiny by scientists and doctors.
He has maintained his innocence for more than 20 years on death row and through two previous execution dates as he and his attorneys argue Nikki died of accidental and natural causes, including severe pneumonia and a fall
A month out from his third execution date, Robert Roberson is not ready to die
Before Roberson’s execution last fall was stayed at the eleventh hour, he had exhausted other avenues of relief through the courts, including a challenge to his conviction through Texas’ “junk science” law. The 2013 law allows people to challenge their convictions based on scientific evidence that was not available during trial.
According to the National Registry of Exonerations, more than 30 people who served time in prison after convictions involving shaken baby syndrome have been declared innocent. If Roberson’s execution proceeds on Oct. 16, lawmakers have said he will be the first person in the country to be put to death in such a case.
As the courts weigh their choices, others — including Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton and Nikki’s brother, Matthew Bowman — maintain the execution should be carried out.
ADVERTISEMENT
Here’s where his appeals stand.
Aug. 20: Pending appeal alleges ‘judicial misconduct’
In an appeal filed on Aug. 20 seeking to present new findings to the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, Roberson’s attorneys alleged “new evidence of judicial misconduct.”
According to his attorneys, Anderson County officials unlawfully authorized taking Nikki off of life support without Roberson’s knowledge or consent — which they said was done to allow for his arrest.
In November 2001, following a custody lawsuit, Roberson was named Nikki’s “sole managing conservator,” which, under Texas law, gives a parent the exclusive legal right to make decisions about a child’s life, including their medical care.
When Nikki was brought to a Palestine hospital on Jan. 31, 2002, Roberson’s attorneys said he was not only presumed guilty of causing her condition, he was also not consulted when she was transferred to Children’s Medical Center Dallas. When Roberson learned about it, he was then told he was “not allowed” to visit her, the appeal says.
Roberson and his legal team had believed hospital staff took the word of Nikki’s maternal grandparents when they said they had legal authority over Nikki. New evidence, however, shows that the hospital, per its protocol, contacted the Anderson County judiciary for confirmation of who could make end-of-life decisions, and that it was a judge who provided “false information” that her grandparents held the authority, Roberson’s attorneys wrote in the filing.
“At the very least, public officials in Anderson County acted recklessly in misinforming CMCD and disregarding Robert’s parental rights,” they said.
The discrepancy was discovered during a conversation between hospital officials and state Rep. Lacey Hull, R-Houston, regarding a bill she introduced during the 2025 legislative session — House Bill 2072. The bill, in part, proposed creating a criminal offense for unlawfully withdrawing or withholding life-sustaining treatment from a patient against the patient’s directive or authorized health care decision.
In a signed affidavit provided to The Dallas Morning News, Hull said that after the bill was filed, she was approached by a representative of Children’s Medical Center Dallas for a meeting.
When Roberson’s case came up during their conversation in February, Hull wrote that an official from Children’s told her the hospital had contacted the judiciary to confirm Nikki’s legal conservatorship, and that the judiciary reported Nikki’s grandparents were her legal guardians and had the right to make end-of-life decisions.
Hull said she believes their meeting was the first time hospital officials were made aware they had been misinformed.
“As a public official and as a private citizen, I am deeply troubled that the State of Texas is pushing to execute someone when so many questions surround how his daughter died and when substantial evidence, yet to be considered by any court, suggests that he committed no crime and instead is the victim of a CAP’s misdiagnosis and an excessive haste to remove his daughter from life support,” Hull wrote in the affidavit.
The court has not yet responded.
July 24: Pending emergency motion seeks ‘necessary’ stay
Days after Roberson’s Oct. 16 execution date was set during a July hearing in Anderson County, his lawyers filed an emergency motion for a stay with the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals. The delay, they said, would allow the panel to weigh the new evidence presented in his other filings.
“The district court’s stated rationale for scheduling Robert’s execution now — to ‘move things along’ — seems incompatible with the truth-seeking function the public expects in matters of life or death,” Roberson’s attorney, Gretchen Sween, said in a news release. “A stay is necessary to remove the artificial and arbitrary time pressure created by scheduling an innocent man’s execution while he has appeals pending.”
Roberson’s team also requested an opportunity to present the new evidence before the court.
The court has not yet responded.
Feb. 19: Pending application for relief cites new examples of controversy
In an application for relief filed in February, Roberson again asked the state’s highest criminal court to exonerate him — and if not, to grant him a new trial, or send his case back to district court for “further fact-finding” — based on new evidence his attorneys argue undermines the integrity of his conviction.
The appeal cited new examples of controversy, including a joint statement from 10 independent pathologists “attesting to the unreliability of the cause and manner of death conclusions” in Nikki’s autopsy report.
The appeal also referenced the case of Andrew Wayne Roark, a Dallas County man who was cleared of wrongdoing in a shaken baby syndrome case late last year. In a news release announcing Roark’s exoneration, the Dallas County district attorney’s office said advancements in science and medicine no longer supported the prosecution’s theory at trial.
The court has not yet responded."
The entire story can be read at:
https://www.dallasnews.com/news/courts/2025/09/16/where-robert-robersons-appeals-stand-ahead-of-his-third-execution-date-in-texas/PUBLISHER'S NOTE: I am monitoring this case/issue/resource. Keep your eye on the Charles Smith Blog for reports on developments. 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 found at: http://www.thestar.com/topic/charlessmith. Information on "The Charles Smith Blog Award"- and its nomination process - can be found at: http://smithforensic.blogspot.com/2011/05/charles-smith-blog-award-nominations.html Please send any comments or information on other cases and issues of interest to the readers of this blog to: hlevy15@gmail.com. Harold Levy: Publisher: The Charles Smith Blog.
SEE BREAKDOWN OF SOME OF THE ON-GOING INTERNATIONAL CASES (OUTSIDE OF THE CONTINENTAL USA) THAT I AM FOLLOWING ON THIS BLOG, AT THE LINK BELOW: HL:
https://www.blogger.com/blog/post/edit/120008354894645705/4704913685758792985
———————————————————————————————
FINAL WORD: (Applicable to all of our wrongful conviction cases): "Whenever there is a wrongful conviction, it exposes errors in our criminal legal system, and we hope that this case — and lessons from it — can prevent future injustices."
Lawyer Radha Natarajan:
Executive Director: New England Innocence Project;
—————————————————————————————————
FINAL, FINAL WORD: "Since its inception, the Innocence Project has pushed the criminal legal system to confront and correct the laws and policies that cause and contribute to wrongful convictions. They never shied away from the hard cases — the ones involving eyewitness identifications, confessions, and bite marks. Instead, in the course of presenting scientific evidence of innocence, they've exposed the unreliability of evidence that was, for centuries, deemed untouchable." So true!
Christina Swarns: Executive Director: The Innocence Project;
-------------------------------------------------------------------
