Sharon Killer Keller

TEXAS JUSTICE SYSTEM


Editorial Board

Monday, August 17, 2009

No matter the outcome of the hearing scheduled to begin today that 
could end in sanctions against embattled Texas Court of Criminal 
Appeals Chief Justice Sharon Keller, her already battered reputation 
will be pounded some more. While the judge's many detractors will 
find some satisfaction in that, the Texas way of administering 
criminal justice also will take a beating.
A politician's reputation is insignificant in the grand scheme of 
things, but if a society claims to be one based on law, then its 
justice system is only as good as the confidence in it.

Beyond the question of whether Keller's handling of a last-minute 
death row appeal was legally appropriate is the much larger question 
of whether criminal appeals in Texas are handled objectively and 
whether the state's court of last resort in criminal cases is in 
reality nothing more than a state agency dedicated to upholding 
convictions.

Texas has always relished its "tough on crime" reputation. 
Politicians who campaign against crime always find a friendly crowd, 
and Keller jumped on that and rode pro-prosecution rhetoric to a seat 
on what should be an objective forum for hearing appeals. But 
promising fairness is boring and doesn't get you on television.

Keller — and by extension, the state's justice system — has been the 
subject of hours of air time, gallons of ink and enough bytes of 
electronic information to operate a fleet of spaceships as a result 
of the case that has led to today's proceedings before the State 
Commission on Judicial Conduct.

A brief background: Lawyers for convicted killer Michael Richard 
tried to file a last-minute, after-hours appeal in 2007. According to 
Richard's lawyers, they were having computer problems and asked if 
they could file motions after 5 p.m. They said they were told "no."

Keller's lawyer disputes that now-famous reply. Furthermore, he 
claims that defense lawyers are to blame for Richard not getting a 
hearing.

Only two months after his release from a second prison term in 1986, 
Richard raped, shot and killed Marguerite Lucille Dixon, 53, a nurse 
and mother of seven, inside her Harris County home. Richard won a 
second trial after pleading that he was abused as a child and 
possessed an IQ well below average. Tried again, he was convicted 
again in 1995 and sentenced to death.
The last-minute appeal was based on the U.S. Supreme Court's 
announcement earlier that same day that it would hear a case arguing 
that death by injection violates the Constitution because it 
constitutes cruel and unusual punishment.

Keller's critics say closing the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals to 
the appeal was callous. The state's Commission on Judicial Conduct 
filed a list of more legal complaints against Keller in connection 
with the Richard case.

The he-said, she-said nature of the depositions doesn't hold much 
promise for shedding light on the situation but offers a rare glimpse 
into the court's inner workings. However repugnant some may find it, 
the hearing ought to be considered mandatory viewing.

Some commentators predict that the worst that will happen is that 
Keller will end up with a slap on the wrist once it's all said and done.

If so, that slap on the wrist will result in yet another black eye on 
a Texas justice system that is supposed to be blind.


Find this article at:
http://www.statesman.com/opinion/content/editorial/stories/