Two recent developments from TX in Clinton Young’s case:
(1) The Midland County trial court is recommending that Clinton should have a new trial.
(2) The former prosecutor who moonlighted as the judge’s clerk while also prosecuting Clinton’s case surrendered his law license.
In Clinton Young’s case, now-former attorney Ralph Petty was simultaneously working on sending Clinton to death row as a prosecutor and moonlighting as the trial judge’s paid clerk and advisor. This is a serious, completely inappropriate conflict of interest.
The Midland County trial court is now recommending that Clinton receive a new trial because the inappropriate prosecutor/clerk/advisor arrangement violated due process, presented a conflict of interest, and constituted “pervasive prosecutorial misconduct.”
The Supreme Court of Texas determined that allegations of professional misconduct levied against Petty were “conclusively established” and ordered his law license immediately revoked and canceled. Petty agreed to resign from law practice to avoid additional disciplinary action.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Sister Helen Prejean

Sister Helen Prejean Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @helenprejean

27 Apr
Last week, the Fifth Circuit affirmed dismissal of Rodney Reed’s federal lawsuit demanding that Texas officials allow DNA testing of evidence that could prove his innocence. The decision shows how the legal system values rule-following over real justice.
Instead of ordering the DNA testing, the Fifth Circuit allowed the state officials to try out a new argument on appeal that hadn’t been raised in the initial hearing at the lower court.
The Fifth Circuit ruled that Rodney Reed’s lawsuit was brought too late because he only had two years from the time that he learned his rights were being violated to file suit.
Read 5 tweets
9 Apr
An investigation by @guardian reveals that states have spent millions on illicit execution drugs, even requesting shipment in “unmarked boxes and jars.” theguardian.com/world/2021/apr…
Arizona purchased enough execution drugs to kill 200 people, at a cost of $1.5 million, and requested that the drugs be shipped from an undisclosed supplier in “unmarked boxes and jars.”
It is a felony under state and federal law to dispense execution drugs without a valid prescription. Medical practitioners are prohibited from prescribing drugs for use in executions. Arizona’s drug purchase was likely illegal.
Read 4 tweets
16 Jan
Justice Breyer also penned a dissent in U.S. v. Dustin Higgs, continuing his long line of opinions calling on the Supreme Court to reconsider whether the death penalty is constitutional in the first place.
After describing several of the legal claims raised by federal death row prisoners, Breyer says, “None of these legal questions is frivolous.” He adds that the Supreme Court’s recent “hurry up, hurry up” process “is no solution.”
Justice Breyer: “How just is a legal system that would execute an individual without consideration of a novel or significant legal question that he has raised?”
Read 7 tweets
16 Jan
Justice Sotomayor opens her dissent in U.S. v. Dustin Higgs by saying the names of every person executed by the federal government over the past year.
Sotomayor continues by providing historical context. The federal government has executed more people over the past six months than it had in the previous six decades.
Sotomayor details some of the legal disputes that have come up around this spree of federal executions. She goes on to say that, “against this backdrop of legal uncertainty, @TheJusticeDept did not tread carefully.”
Read 18 tweets
12 Dec 20
The SCOTUS voted to allow the federal government to execute Alfred Bourgeois despite the fact that he is intellectually disabled with an IQ measured between 70-75. Justice Sotomayor published a dissent joined by Justice Kagan.
The Federal Death Penalty Act clearly forbids the execution of a person who is “mentally retarded” (language from the statute). A federal district court found that Bourgeois had made a “strong showing” of intellectual disability but that was reversed by the 7th Circuit.
The 7th Circuit said that another court had found no intellectual disability in 2011. But that court relied on discredited observations and assumptions about people with intellectual disabilities in reaching its decision.
Read 8 tweets
11 Dec 20
The SCOTUS has denied Brandon Bernard’s petition and this unjust execution will move forward now. Justices Breyer, Sotomayor, and Kagan would have granted a stay. Justice Sotomayor published a six-page dissent that lays out many of the legal reasons why this execution is wrong.
Justice Sotomayor details serious misconduct committed by federal prosecutors in Brandon Bernard’s case. Prosecutors knowingly presented false testimony and covered up evidence.
Prosecutors claimed at trial that Brandon Bernard was a ringleader in a gang. Before Brandon’s trial, a police officer investigator gave the prosecutors a pyramid chart showing that Brandon was actually at the bottom of any gang hierarchy. Prosecutors covered up that evidence.
Read 5 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

:(