The United States Supreme Court has refused a second appeal to reconsider the death penalty conviction of a man from Austin, citing dubious DNA evidence as the reason for the request. Areli Escobar was deemed guilty and received a death sentence in 2011 for the crimes of murder and sexual assault inflicted upon Bianca Maldonado, a 17-year-old girl. A move to procure a new trial was initiated by Escobar’s lawyers, following the discovery of significant worries at the crime laboratory of the Austin Police Department, which had mishandled certain DNA evidence. The defense for Escobar has stated that the prosecution, a responsibility of Travis County District Attorney’s Office, depended on this potentially compromised DNA examination to secure a conviction.
A contention for a fresh trial was made by Escobar’s defense, which claimed that the DNA evidence that Travis County District Attorney’s Office relied on was possibly compromised. Now helmed by José Garza, a notable reformist, the office agrees with the fact that there were issues with the case and teamed up with the defense in advocating for a new trial. Support for a new trial also comes from various other legal entities including a prior Travis County district court judge, the American Bar Association, a collection of former state attorneys general, numerous state prosecutors, and several U.S. attorneys.
However, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, on two separate occasions, has denied the claims made by Escobar regarding denial of due process rights. The legal team for Escobar has subseqently taken the case to the Supreme Court twice. The initial appeal resulted in the high court siding with Escobar by nullifying the decision of the appeals court to retain the conviction. The case was then sent back to the criminal appeals court for reassessment.
Despite the Supreme Court’s decision, the Court of Criminal Appeals maintained their stance. They decided not to acknowledge the fresh defense testimonies that challenged the authenticity of the evidence and presented an alternative potential culprit. The second appeal made by Escobar for a review was rejected by the high court on Monday, without providing any justification for their ruling.
While this decision by the high court implies Escobar is to remain on death row, his execution is not imminent. Just three days after the conviction of Escobar was passed, further DNA testing of the trial’s evidence was conducted. This testing provided inconclusive results, a fact that Escobar’s defense wasn’t privy to until 2017, after they had lodged an appeal.
An appeal that was filed a year before the lawyer’s team discovered the inconclusive DNA evidence. Around the same time, an enforcement by the Texas Forensic Science Commission led to the closure of the crime laboratory, which was overseen by the Austin Police Department. This investigation identified several major issues in the DNA section of the APD’s Forensic Science Division, which include contamination and application of unscientific procedures.
Since the lab was closed nine years ago, the state Court of Criminal Appeals has reversed two convictions that were associated with the lab’s mismanagement of evidence. The recent denial by the Supreme Court to review Escobar’s case comes on the heels of a verdict being invalidated in a similar case from Oklahoma, barely a month ago.
In both cases, the petitioners’ question to the high court remains the same, asking whether a capital conviction can be overturned if the case appears to be plagued with such serious flaws that even the prosecution ceases to defend it. Yet, this probing question was left unanswered by the justices.
The opposition to this line of thinking in both the Escobar and similar Glossip cases was advocated by Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, who filed briefs. According to Paxton, convictions must undergo independent review by the courts, instead of being weighted extra due to prosecutions’ admission of error. He believes that favoring such admissions of error from prosecutors could skew sentencing outcomes from both previous cases and those yet to be judged, making them more influenced by the political inclinations of local prosecutors.
The post Supreme Court Refusing Second Appeal in the Controversial Austin Death Penalty Case appeared first on Real News Now.
About Author
