Judge Who Closed Courthouse Doors Faces Discipline

By TChris, Section Death Penalty
Posted on Wed Feb 25, 2009 at 10:36:00 AM EST
Tags: (all tags)

Share This: Digg!

You may recall the shameful work of Judge Sharon Keller, the appellate judge in Texas who (without consulting her colleagues) refused to keep the courthouse doors open for 20 minutes past closing time to accept a petition for a stay of execution. The stay request was based on the Supreme Court's decision to consider the constitutionality of executions carried out by lethal injection. The Supreme Court granted a stay request to a different Texas inmate two days later, but Michael Richards wasn't so lucky. Thanks to Judge Keller, he was killed without having a chance to have his stay request heard.

In addition to being condemned by lawyers and her judicial colleagues, Judge Keller's outrageous behavior caught the attention of the State Commission on Judicial Conduct, which brought five charges against her. [more ...]

They included a “willing and persistent failure to follow [Court of Criminal Appeals] execution-day procedures” and a denial of an “open court or the right to heard according to law.” In perhaps the most damning professional charge yet, the commission found that Judge Keller’s actions “[casted] public discredit on the judiciary.”

If the Commission (after a public hearing) determines that the charges have merit, it can either censure the judge or recommend that the Texas Supreme Court remove her from office.

While private hearings with the Commission of Judicial Conduct are the norm in these cases, the executive director of the committee, Seana Willing, told the Dallas Morning News that a public hearing would provide the judge the “opportunity for due process, to cross-examine and confront witnesses” brought against her.
Judge Keller should be so lucky as to have the justice system work — at least for her. For all the anger at the judge’s actions, Texans can take pride in knowing that, whichever state entity decides her fate, she will be afforded the due process of law which every U.S. citizen is entitled to (and which she denied Richard).

< A Chance To Slam Bill Clinton Can Not be Missed | How To Make Ideological Shifts Happen >

Legal

Nothing on this site should be construed as legal advice. TalkLeft does not give legal advice.

TalkLeft is not responsible for and often disagrees with material posted in the comments section. Read at your own risk.

Judge Who Closed Courthouse Doors Faces Discipline | 17 comments (17 topical)

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

Hmmm (5.00 / 1) (#2)
by blogtopus on Wed Feb 25, 2009 at 10:14:09 AM EST

So how does one punish a judge for a deliberate act of breaking rules to ensure a person is killed needlessly?

The judge's actions were shameful and odious. (none / 0) (#7)
by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed Feb 25, 2009 at 11:57:33 AM EST

However, her actions did not magically undo the murder and sexual assault Michael Richard committed.

Two months after he had been paroled from prison, Michael Richard approached Marguerite Dixon's son, Albert, in front of the Dixon home in Hockley and asked if a yellow van parked outside the home was for sale.
Albert said the vehicle belonged to his brother who was out of town and suggested that Richard come back another time. Richard left.
When Albert and his sister, Paula, left a few minutes later, Richard returned and entered the house.
He took two television sets and put them in the yellow van, sexually assaulted Mrs. Dixon and shot her in the head with a .25 caliber automatic pistol.

yes they were. (5.00 / 2) (#13)
by cpinva on Wed Feb 25, 2009 at 02:27:05 PM EST

The judge's actions were shameful and odious.

and everything you wrote after that was totally irrelevant to the issue at hand. it changes nothing, regarding the judge's "odious" actions, which is the actual subject of this discussion.


It's almost as though you didn't read the comment (none / 0) (#16)
by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed Feb 25, 2009 at 03:15:15 PM EST

I responded to.


: state senate won't impeach her (none / 0) (#17)
by diogenes on Wed Feb 25, 2009 at 09:54:07 PM EST

Unless someone here is saying that there is DNA evidence or something to prove innocence, she'll get slapped on the wrist for now.

How 'Bout (1.00 / 1) (#3)
by squeaky on Wed Feb 25, 2009 at 11:34:17 AM EST

Putting strapping her in the death chair, mixing up the cocktail, and then flipping a coin to determine her fate.

Maybe that would wake her up, if she lives.

Encouraging (none / 0) (#1)
by joanneleon on Wed Feb 25, 2009 at 08:54:37 AM EST

I rarely hear about accountability for judges. Having seen some pretty outrageous (I thought) and arrogant behavior from a few local judges at the county and municipal level, I find it satisfying to know that a public hearing might occur where the tables are turned and the judge is the one on the "hot seat". We have a municipal judge who gets his jollies by ridiculing people before him, for no good reason, in order to get a response from the "audience". Of course, this doesn't compare to toying with a person's death sentence, but still, I think it should be addressed.

And statements like this

Judge Keller should be so lucky as to have the justice system work -- at least for her. For all the anger at the judge's actions, Texans can take pride in knowing that, whichever state entity decides her fate, she will be afforded the due process of law which every U.S. citizen is entitled to (and which she denied Richard).

are really good to see. This person, I assume, is one who will never have to try a case before this judge. Grovelling before judges, regardless of the situation, is something that I understand the reason for, but find very difficult to witness.

I don't (none / 0) (#4)
by eric on Wed Feb 25, 2009 at 11:41:09 AM EST

get this. In Minnesota, the courts are always open, even for civil actions. In practice, of course, the courts aren't physically open, but there is ALWAYS a judge available.

Minn. R. Civ. P. 77: "The district courts shall be deemed always open for the purpose of filing any pleading or other proper paper, of issuing and returning mesne and final process, and of making and directing all interlocutory motions, orders, and rules."

Doesn't this concept exist in Texas?

Many concepts... (none / 0) (#5)
by Dadler on Wed Feb 25, 2009 at 11:44:48 AM EST

...don't exist in Texas. I couldn't even get a decent salad the last time I was there. Justice? Forget it.


A little defense of Texas here (5.00 / 1) (#6)
by txpublicdefender on Wed Feb 25, 2009 at 11:52:00 AM EST

For the record, the Court of Criminal Appeals had a procedure that designated a particular judge to be available for any after-hours pleadings and stay requests. It is Judge Keller's refusal to follow those procedures that got her in the hot seat. The judge on the Court who was the designated judge that day was available for any late filing, but she didn't even hear about a request until the next morning, after the man had been executed. She was livid, and she said so publicly.

This is not the first time Judge Keller has come under fire, of course. She was one of the first formulators of the "unindicted co-ejaculator" theory (otherwise known as "the victim was a whore" theory) to deny relief to a man who had clearly been exonerated by DNA evidence. It took further tests on other pieces of evidence to finally convince her that the man was innocent--years later, of course.


Then I am not (none / 0) (#8)
by eric on Wed Feb 25, 2009 at 01:02:15 PM EST

clear about what happened. Why didn't somebody pick up the phone and call the judge that was available?


my guess, and it's just a guess, (5.00 / 1) (#14)
by cpinva on Wed Feb 25, 2009 at 02:37:18 PM EST

Why didn't somebody pick up the phone and call the judge that was available?

the judge's personal phone#'s are unlisted, and i doubt they're in the habit of giving them out to lawyers. in order to get to the second judge, the attorney had to go through the first one, who would then contact the second.

as i noted above, this is purely speculation on my part, but it explains the failure to directly contact the available judge.


Precisely my question as well, (none / 0) (#9)
by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed Feb 25, 2009 at 01:09:22 PM EST

back in 2007 when this case was first discussed on TL...

I think Keller screwed the pooch on this one, (none / 0) (#16)
by sarcastic unnamed one on Fri Oct 05, 2007 at 08:58:26 AM PST
however, wtf?! Did the defense team just sigh, give each other a "hey, we tried" slap on the back, turn off their lights and go home at 5PM? None of them thought to call Johnson, the GD judge who was actually in charge of last minute appeals, directly?! No one drove to the courthouse and pounded on freaking doors? Tried cell phones? Called other judges at home or whatever?!
There HAS to be more to this story.

The only thing that (none / 0) (#10)
by eric on Wed Feb 25, 2009 at 01:37:47 PM EST

I can figure is that she was the "presiding judge" in the court of criminal appeals, and was able to interpose herself between the lawyers and the assigned judge. Perhaps she told them that nobody would hear the request for a stay? A lot is made of the fact that the court wasn't kept open late, but even then, it doesn't really make sense because these lawyers, you would think, would have tried to call the other judge.


: Yup. (none / 0) (#12)
by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed Feb 25, 2009 at 01:42:17 PM EST

The Story Is (none / 0) (#11)
by squeaky on Wed Feb 25, 2009 at 01:38:21 PM EST

Judge Keller knew exactly what she was doing and had she not wanted to see another death so badly Richard's execution would have been put off.

Here is the whole story. It shows not just a cold heart but clear intent to obstruct justice.

And these people on the State Commission are largelly pro death GOPers.

From grits for breakfast:

What's more, the Commission on Judicial Conduct is hardly known for ousting powerful, high court judges, though I'd be (pleasantly) surprised to see them do so now. And the GOP dominated Senate would never convict her, even in the (highly) unlikely event she was impeached in the House.

: Thanks for the (5.00 / 1) (#15)
by eric on Wed Feb 25, 2009 at 02:57:02 PM EST

link, that answers my questions. But it STILL does not explain why more wasn't done. After being stonewalled by Judge Keller, they should have called another judge, any judge about this. They obviously had the phone numbers, as they were able to call Keller at home, and they were apparently emailing all of the judges with status updates.