The scheduled execution of Texas death row inmate Robert Roberson, convicted for the death of his 2-year-old daughter, has been temporarily halted.
This decision came late Thursday night when the Texas Supreme Court issued a partial stay, according to court filings.
The stay occurred just over an hour before the expiration of Roberson’s death warrant, following a flurry of legal exchanges as both the state and Roberson’s defenders fought over his impending fate.
The Supreme Court’s swift ruling followed a split decision from the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, which earlier in the evening had overturned a lower court’s order stopping the execution.
Despite this last-minute reprieve, Roberson’s future remains uncertain. His death warrant expired at midnight Thursday, but legal battles continue, and a new execution date could be set, possibly after he provides testimony before state lawmakers next week, or sooner if the court orders.
The delay was set in motion by the Texas House Committee on Criminal Jurisprudence, which, on Wednesday, voted to subpoena Roberson as they review the legality of his conviction.
Roberson’s attorney, Gretchen Sween, expressed hope that his case could prompt reform in the criminal justice system, stating, “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.”
At the heart of Roberson’s case is his conviction for allegedly killing his daughter, Nikki Curtis, by shaken baby syndrome—a diagnosis his defense team has long argued is scientifically flawed.
His attorneys have pointed out that recent medical research has discredited shaken baby syndrome as a definitive cause of death.
Despite this, Roberson’s conviction was upheld in numerous appeals, and both the Texas pardons board and the U.S. Supreme Court declined to intervene in his case.
Roberson’s legal team fought desperately to delay the execution. After multiple state court appeals were denied, the Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles rejected his clemency plea, and the U.S. Supreme Court refused to step in.
The last hope came from the House committee’s subpoena and a restraining order granted earlier on Thursday. However, the restraining order was vacated by a state appeals court later that evening, with four dissenting judges urging further examination of the case.
Following the appeals court ruling, Roberson’s advocates petitioned the Texas Supreme Court to block the Texas Department of Criminal Justice from carrying out the execution.
The Supreme Court responded with a temporary stay, allowing Roberson’s testimony to proceed.
“The state cannot prevent Mr. Roberson from complying with the subpoena issued by Texas lawmakers, including by executing him, until further order of this Court,” the court declared.
Texas Supreme Court Justice Evan Young, concurring with the stay, noted that the district court had not overstepped its bounds in issuing the restraining order earlier that day.
State lawmakers lauded the court’s decision, with Representatives Joe Moody and Jeff Leach releasing a joint statement, saying, “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. And while some courthouses may have failed him, the Texas House has not.”
As the execution loomed, Roberson had already been transferred to the Huntsville Unit, where the procedure was set to occur.
His case has garnered significant attention due to its reliance on the contested shaken baby syndrome diagnosis. If the execution had gone forward, Roberson would have been the first person in the U.S. put to death based on such a claim, which his attorneys assert was a misdiagnosis in this instance.
Shaken baby syndrome, though still recognized by pediatric experts, is seen by Roberson’s defense team as having contributed to a flawed conviction. They argue that Nikki Curtis may have died from a combination of untreated illness, including double pneumonia and sepsis, alongside medications now considered dangerous for children in her condition.
Additionally, they argue that Nikki had fallen from her bed the night before being brought to a hospital, and her already fragile state could have accounted for the symptoms that were misinterpreted as abuse.
Former detective Brian Wharton, who led the investigation into Nikki’s death, testified to Texas lawmakers on Wednesday, expressing remorse over his role in the case.
“I told my wife last week that I’m ashamed. I’m ashamed that I was so focused on finding an offender and convicting someone that I did not see Robert. I did not hear his voice,” Wharton told the lawmakers. “He’s an innocent man, and we are very close to killing him for something he did not do.”
Wharton, along with a coalition of more than 30 scientists, 80 Texas legislators, autism advocates, and author John Grisham, rallied behind Roberson in an effort to halt the execution.
They pointed to various exonerations in shaken baby syndrome cases across the U.S. since 1992 and questioned the validity of the medical evidence used in Roberson’s trial.
Roberson’s legal fight also hinges on Texas Article 11.073, commonly referred to as the “junk science writ.” This law allows defendants to challenge their convictions when new scientific evidence emerges. Roberson’s supporters believe that his case falls squarely within the law’s purview, as medical advancements since his trial have undermined shaken baby syndrome as a definitive cause of death.
Despite these arguments, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals denied Roberson’s appeal on procedural grounds, refusing to review the new evidence his attorneys presented. State Rep.
Leach expressed hope that the governor and the parole board were paying attention, saying, “because the law that the legislature passed and our governor signed into law is being ignored by our courts, and all we’re seeking to do here is to push the pause button to make sure that it’s enforced.”
Roberson’s attorneys have clarified that they are not denying the possibility that babies can die from being shaken. However, they argue that alternative causes, such as illness, should be fully investigated before a conclusion of abuse is reached.
The shaken baby syndrome diagnosis remains a point of contention within the medical and legal communities. While the American Academy of Pediatrics and many child abuse pediatricians support the diagnosis, critics argue that it has led to wrongful convictions, with cases like Roberson’s drawing attention to the need for more rigorous scientific scrutiny in child abuse cases.
