PALESTINE, Texas — A retired Texas judge who earlier this year authorized the execution of death row inmate Robert Roberson has stepped away from his case. The announcement was made in a court filing by Senior State District Judge Deborah Oakes Evans in Anderson County on Monday, though the reasons for her recusal were not specified.
Roberson was condemned for the 2003 capital murder of his 2-year-old daughter, Nikki Curtis, who suffered from chronic health issues. Prosecutors argued that Roberson violently shook Nikki, leading to her death. Roberson, who was diagnosed with autism after his conviction, has consistently claimed his innocence in the matter.
Evans first became involved in Roberson’s legal proceedings in 2016 when his initial execution was stayed, and the case was remanded back to the trial court by the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals. Following a nine-day hearing, Evans recommended denying all relief. She retired in 2022 but returned to preside over the case after the state of Texas sought a new execution date in 2024, setting it for October 17.
Roberson’s defense team quickly moved to challenge this decision, requesting a hearing before Evans, which was denied. On September 25, they filed a motion for the recusal of Evans and sought to have the execution warrant set aside.
The motion to recuse Evans pointed to her sudden reassignment after retirement and her connections with key figures in the original trial, including the original prosecutor, the judge who terminated Roberson’s parental rights, and the current Anderson County district attorney who opposed Roberson’s habeas relief. However, when Evans declined to recuse herself, an administrative judge reviewed and denied the recusal motion on October 15, merely two days before the scheduled execution.
In a surprising turn, the Texas House Committee on Criminal Jurisprudence intervened on behalf of Roberson, citing concerns over his claims of innocence and the integrity of his conviction. They issued a subpoena to Roberson that eventually led to a postponement of his execution scheduled for October 17. The Texas Supreme Court, however, ruled on November 12 that such a subpoena does not have the authority to block an execution, paving the way for the state to set a new execution date.
The House committee continues supporting Roberson, challenging his conviction which they believe is based on questionable forensic science. A new date for execution has yet to be established as the committee seeks further testimony from Roberson regarding his trial and subsequent appeals.
This ongoing case highlights significant issues around judicial process and the ethics of capital punishment, particularly concerning defendants with disabilities like autism, and raises important questions about the application and implications of forensic science in the courtroom.
Please note: This article was generated by an automated system and may contain inaccuracies. For correction, removal, or retraction requests, please contact contact@publiclawlibrary.org.