QUOTE OF THE DAY: "On Monday, Sween said there is no “legitimate purpose” for a monthslong delay. She noted that the appeal that got Roberson his stay was filed back in February, and that the attorney general’s office argued to dismiss it, so extensive review shouldn’t be necessary. “One would hope that the OAG (Office of the Attorney General) advocated for a dismissal only after reviewing the vast record, researching the germane law, studying Applicant’s voluminous new evidentiary proffers, and somehow concluding that an execution was nevertheless justified,” Sween wrote. She also said the state is basing its timeline on a law that doesn’t apply in this case because the appeals court has “presupposed” that an evidentiary hearing is expected."
————————————————————
PASSAGE OF THE DAY: "Roberson, 59, was convicted of capital murder in 2003 having been accused of 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 experts. Roberson’s legal team has long sought to present the evidence they’ve compiled since his capital murder trial that they say will prove his daughter died of accidental and natural causes. The Texas attorney general’s office, however, has argued there is still enough proof of abuse to uphold Roberson’s death sentence."
———————————————————————
PASSAGE TWO OF THE DAY: "Roberson was last spared on Oct. 9, exactly one week before he was scheduled to be put to death by lethal injection. The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals sent his case back to district court in light of a ruling made late last year in a similar case out of Dallas County. In that case, Andrew Roark’s conviction was vacated on the basis that the science of shaken baby syndrome had evolved, and that expert witnesses would have given different testimony had he gone to trial in 2024."
------------------------------------------------------
STORY: "State pushes back on evidentiary hearing in Robert Roberson’s death penalty case," by Reporter Jamie Landers, published by The Dallas Morning News, on November 112, 2025. (Jamie Landers is a breaking news reporter at The Dallas Morning News. She is a graduate of The Walter Cronkite School of Journalism and Mass Communication in Phoenix, where she studied journalism and political science. Jamie previously reported for The Arizona Republic and Arizona PBS.)
SUB-Heading: "Here’s a look at what has happened in the courts since the 59-year-old got his third stay of execution on Oct. 9."
PHOTO CAPTION: "Robert Roberson, the Palestine man facing execution for the death of his 2-year-old."
1
GIST: Documents filed in the weeks since Robert Roberson III was granted his third stay of execution show the state is pushing back on an evidentiary hearing that could lead to the new trial his attorneys have been chasing just shy of a decade.
Roberson, 59, was convicted of capital murder in 2003 having been accused of 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 experts.
Roberson’s legal team has long sought to present the evidence they’ve compiled since his capital murder trial that they say will prove his daughter died of accidental and natural causes. The Texas attorney general’s office, however, has argued there is still enough proof of abuse to uphold Roberson’s death sentence.
Roberson was last spared on Oct. 9, exactly one week before he was scheduled to be put to death by lethal injection. The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals sent his case back to district court in light of a ruling made late last year in a similar case out of Dallas County. In that case, Andrew Roark’s conviction was vacated on the basis that the science of shaken baby syndrome had evolved, and that expert witnesses would have given different testimony had he gone to trial in 2024.
According to filings obtained by The Dallas Morning News, Roberson’s lead attorney Gretchen Sween filed on Oct. 22 a motion seeking a status conference — or a pre-trial meeting for attorneys — which she said would allow for an evidentiary hearing to be scheduled as soon as possible.
“This matter should not languish for months; it is in the interest of both parties to move with alacrity,” Sween wrote in the motion.
Smith County District Judge Austin Reeve Jackson responded the next day, and asked that both parties provide dates they would not be available for the hearing between now and Jan. 31, 2026. He also asked for a brief summary of each side’s expectations for witnesses and time neededto proceed.
“This is not to say that a status conference or scheduling order will not be warranted at some time in the future, but Applicant puts the cart well ahead of the horse,” the state said. “... Even if the Court finds otherwise, it has discretion still on how to resolve the issues, which can include affidavits, depositions, etc. without the need for an evidentiary hearing.”
On Monday, Sween said there is no “legitimate purpose” for a monthslong delay. She noted that the appeal that got Roberson his stay was filed back in February, and that the attorney general’s office argued to dismiss it, so extensive review shouldn’t be necessary.
“One would hope that the OAG advocated for a dismissal only after reviewing the vast record, researching the germane law, studying Applicant’s voluminous new evidentiary proffers, and somehow concluding that an execution was nevertheless justified,” Sween wrote.
She also said the state is basing its timeline on a law that doesn’t apply in this case because the appeals court has “presupposed” that an evidentiary hearing is expected.
Sween outlined three instances in which judges cited the need for evidentiary development in their concurring opinions ordering the stay last month. In one, Court of Criminal Appeals Judge Bert Richardson said since Roberson has not been given a chance to challenge his conviction under the court’s new understanding of shaken baby syndrome, it was “correct to stay the execution and remand this case to the habeas court for Applicant to develop his claims in an evidentiary hearing.”
“A death sentence is clearly final and, once carried out, hindsight is useless,” Richardson wrote. “Thus, when moving forward in such a way, we should require the highest standards of accuracy so that we can act with a reliable degree of certainty.
“That is not possible with the record we presently have before us.“
Another judge wrote they should skip the remand and head straight to a new trial.
Jackson, the trial judge, has not yet responded with next steps.""
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;
-------------------------------------------------------------------
