The Texas Supreme Court late Thursday halted the execution of Robert Roberson hours after it was set to take place, capping a flurry of litigation filed that same day by Texas state lawmakers in a last-ditch gambit to stop the state from killing a death row inmate they believed was most likely innocent.
The order was a stunning 11th-hour victory for Roberson and for the state lawmakers who opposed his execution and turned to novel legal maneuvers in an effort to buy him more time.
The stay arrived in response to a separation-of-powers conflict touched off by a group of Texas lawmakers when they subpoenaed Roberson the night before he was set to be put to death. The unprecedented step sought to give the man a final lifeline after a series of court rejections left him on track to become the first person in the country executed for allegedly shaking a baby to death.
“The vast team fighting for Robert Roberson—people all across Texas, the country, and the world—are elated tonight that a contingent of brave, bipartisan Texas lawmakers chose to dig deep into the facts of Robert’s case that no court had yet considered and recognized that his life was worth fighting for,” Gretchen Sween, Roberson’s attorney, said in a statement. “He lives to fight another day, and hopes that his experience can help improve the integrity of our criminal legal system.”
Along with the stay, the Texas Supreme Court ordered a lower court to resolve the separation-of-powers issue, halting Roberson’s execution in the meantime. It was not immediately clear what legal recourse Roberson still had to vacate his execution, despite the stay. The courts have rejected all of his appeals thus far.
The stay arrived amid a thundering chorus of people who believed the state was about to kill an innocent man, and who hoped last-ditch measures would buy him more time.
“For over 20 years, Robert Roberson has spent 23.5 hours of every single day in solitary confinement in a cell no bigger than the closets of most Texans, longing and striving to be heard,” state Representatives Joe Moody (D-El Paso) and Jeff Leach (R-Plano) said in a statement after the order came down. “We look forward to welcoming Robert to the Texas Capitol, and along with 31 million Texans, finally giving him—and the truth—a chance to be heard.”
After being told about the stay, Roberson “praised God and thanked his supporters,” a spokeswoman for the Texas Department of Criminal Justice said.
Earlier Thursday, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals had cleared the way for the execution to proceed, overruling a Travis County judge who hours earlier said the state can’t execute Roberson if doing so prevents him from complying with the legislative subpoena.
The Texas House Committee on Criminal Jurisprudence then asked the Texas Supreme Court late Thursday to temporarily block the state from executing Roberson, arguing that the CCA did not have jurisdiction over the subpoena. The CCA handles criminal matters in Texas, while the state’s supreme court handles civil matters.
“Whether the legislature may use its authority to compel the attendance of witnesses to block the executive branch’s authority to enforce a sentence of death is a question of Texas civil law, not its criminal law,” Texas Supreme Court Justice Evan Young wrote in a concurring opinion. “The question implicates the distribution of authority among the three branches of government, pitting two branches against each other. … These questions implicate the separation of powers at a high level.”
The U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday afternoon also declined to stop the execution, though Justice Sonia Sotomayor urged Governor Greg Abbott to issue a 30-day reprieve. Abbott has remained silent on the case.
Roberson was convicted of killing his 2-year-old daughter, Nikki Curtis, who was diagnosed with shaken baby syndrome. But experts, lawmakers and the lead detective in the girl’s case say the science supporting Roberson’s death sentence no longer holds up—and the state’s “junk science” law should have already halted his execution.
The Texas House Criminal Jurisprudence Committee’s subpoena—which was offered by Leach, Moody and state Representative Brian Harrison (R-Midlothian) on Wednesday—requires Roberson to appear for testimony at the committee’s October 21 hearing, which set up conflicting legal obligations for the TDCJ: to execute Roberson on Thursday, or present him at the hearing. That separation-of-powers issue is set to be resolved by the Travis County district court.
Sween said that she had “no knowledge” of a subpoena being used before in an effort to pump the brakes on an execution. “It shows how strongly the lawmakers who have learned about this case feel about the injustice,” she said.
The state parole board’s six members voted unanimously earlier Wednesday to deny Roberson’s clemency application, as lawmakers raised concerns that the courts were not properly implementing a groundbreaking 2013 “junk science” law that was intended to provide justice to people convicted based on scientific evidence that has since changed or been debunked. The parole board has recommended clemency in just one capital case out of the 85 applications it has considered over the past decade.
“It is not shocking that the criminal justice system failed Mr. Roberson so badly. What’s shocking is that, so far, the system has been unable to correct itself,” Sween said in a statement after the parole board’s vote. “We pray that Governor Abbott does everything in his power to prevent the tragic, irreversible mistake of executing an innocent man.”
The Texas House Criminal Jurisprudence Committee held a hearing spotlighting Roberson’s case and the junk science law on Wednesday. Critics have argued that in the decade since the bill became law, it has rarely provided justice as intended to wrongfully convicted individuals.
The committee urged the state’s highest criminal court on Tuesday to stay Roberson’s execution through the 2025 legislative session, saying that the junk science law “has been applied in a manner that raises serious constitutional and equitable concerns.”
“It is beyond dispute that medical evidence presented at Mr. Roberson’s trial in 2003 is inconsistent with modern scientific principles,” the lawmakers wrote to the court, requesting a stay so that the Legislature could consider amendments to the law. “We believe it would be a stain on the conscience of the State of Texas for an execution to proceed while efforts are underway to remedy deficiencies in how the law was applied to this case.”
A broad, unlikely coalition had launched a feverish campaign to stop Roberson’s execution. Brian Wharton, the lead detective in Roberson’s case, called for his exoneration, as did bestselling author John Grisham. A large bipartisan majority of the Texas House asked the courts to take a second look at his case. Figures ranging from state Democrats and anti-death penalty organizations to Doug Deason, a GOP megadonor and Abbott ally, and former presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. pressed Abbott to step in.
“I felt like God was pushing me and telling me that I needed to get involved in this case,” Deason told the Houston Chronicle. “Let’s not put a man to death when there are some issues and open questions.”
Roberson has maintained his innocence over 20 years on death row.
“Governor Abbott, I did not do this,” Roberson said in an interview with NBC News’ Lester Holt that aired October 3. “And I’m just hoping and praying that you do the right thing.”
He has argued that his conviction was based on an unfounded shaken baby syndrome diagnosis given to his daughter, which presumed abuse and did not consider her severe illness before her death. Prosecutors have maintained that Nikki suffered multiple traumas and that there was clear evidence of abuse—conclusions that Roberson’s attorneys dispute.
The courts have rejected all of his appeals so far, with the state’s highest criminal court, on procedural grounds, declining on Wednesday to stop his execution. It previously denied his arguments, without considering their merits.
The refusal by the state’s highest criminal court to consider Roberson’s argument that his conviction relied on a faulty shaken baby syndrome diagnosis, lawmakers said, reflected a breakdown of due process and a failure to implement the junk science law as the Legislature intended.
“This was a pretty clear case where Robert Roberson did not have due process,” state Representative Lacey Hull (R-Houston) said on CNN on Tuesday. “Texans deserve to know that our justice system is fair and just, and we cannot say that right now.”
Dozens of scientists, medical professionals, parental rights groups, organizations that advocate for people with autism and faith leaders submitted letters in support of clemency along with Roberson’s application.
Letters from his friends and loved ones depicted a gentle man of faith who remembered people’s favorite colors and sent handmade birthday cards to everyone he met.
“This man would never harm another person, especially not his small little baby girl!” Manuela Doris Roberson, whom Roberson married in 2022, wrote in one letter. “Robert’s life is worth more to me, his children, his friends and loved ones than all the treasures of this world.”
Pooja Salhotra contributed to this report.
This article originally appeared in The Texas Tribune.
