Texas. Here Ye! Hear Ye!
From the Lone Star State. The Texas State Commission on Judicial Conduct has charged Judge Keller with “incompetence, violating her duties and casting public discredit on the judiciary” stemming from a death penalty case in which she refused to extend her clerk’s office hours so Michael Richard’s attorneys could file an appeal in his death penalty case. Richard’s was executed later that evening.
What if the dead dude was innocent?
We certainly hope Judge Keller had a nice dinner that evening.
Hey Judge Keller knew he was guilty and deserved to die! It’s TEXAS man we “call’em like we see’m”—-> this ain’t CaLEFTornia! Let God sort it out! PLEEEEESE….find a case with merit to defend.
James, Thanks for your thoughts. We don’t quarrel with the necessity of the death penalty. That said, we do believe that even the “guilty” are entitled to due process as set forth in relevant criminal and civil statutes. If Texans want to “give em’ a fair trial and hang em’” that’s okay by us. But judges and attorneys need to allow due process to take whatever course the people of Texas deem appropriate. The accused’s attorneys were running late. They informed the judge of that. Judge Keller could, and we argue should, have given them the time they needed to file their appeal. Then Keller could have made an informed decision as to whether or not to grant a hearing or let the execution go forward. Make sense?
This is on the attorneys not the judge. The rules are published as are the court’s hours and the attorneys knew the rules. The judge merely enforced them. Personally it would have been nice to leave the courthouse open later for accept the filings, but some people are sticklers for the rules. Be aware and deal with them accordingly.
BTW: Why were this man’s attorneys waiting until the extreme last minute to file their papers?
Chris: We don’t disagree this is ALSO “on the attorneys.” And we EXPECT the Texas bar will address that with them.
Our understanding is the attorneys contacted the clerk’s office to inform them they were running late. The judge should hold them accountable for running late.
Richard’s had no control over his attorney’s timeliness yet he and his family had to suffer the consequences of the judge’s inflexibility and his attorney’s failure to meet her deadline.
Our strong feeling is judges have the obligation to protect both the accused and victims.
Imagine if you were Richards? We understand there is some evidence he may be innocent.
The public should not tolerate such malarkey in any case not just a death penalty case. The stakes are too high for this kind of behavior to occur.
Thanks for your comment. Judge Keller and the attorneys need to be held accountable PERIOD!
What satisfactory remedy? I almost put a smiley face on that sentence, but decided against it. I mean, OK, perhaps something akin to a civil wrongful death action, but I’m feeling that TX might well have some form of governmental immunity under a tort claims act, or some such thing. And the judge was acting within the law — not necessarily the law of morals, but the law. So, action against judge is not likely to be very successful.
On the other hand, action against the attorneys is very likely, and might be a decent remedial solution. Of course, I have a problem with a monetary compensatory remedy in any w/d action, because really, you can’t put a price tag on a human head. But that is what we are left with. Please keep us updated.
Postscript: I feel like I’m answering a l/s exam right now.
The lawyers were running late because their appeal of the case was based on a U.S. Supreme Court decision to review the constitutionally of death by injection that had been made the very same day. The lawyers were also delayed because the State of Texas electronic court filing system had been malfunctioning. Still, whatever the reason for the lawyers’ delay one of a judge’s key duties is uphold the rights of the defendant throughout the judicial process not to punish the defendant for the actions of the defendant’s lawyers. If the judge thought the lawyers were at fault she could have sanctioned them after hearing the case. Killing the defendant to “spite” the lawyers is unconscionable.