16-05-2025
Texas lawmakers pass bill to improve state's junk science law
The Brief
House lawmakers approved a bill to clarify Texas' junk science law.
If approved, low-income defendants would be entitled to an attorney and the Court of Criminal Appeals would be required to issue a written opinion on denied appeals.
Critics of Texas' junk science law say that it isn't working as intended with its current language.
AUSTIN, Texas - The Texas House on Thursday approved changes to the state's "junk science" law.
The 2013 law allows a person convicted of a crime to seek relief if the evidence used against them is no longer credible.
On Thursday, lawmakers advanced a bill that would make changes to the law that were suggested during an out-of-session House committee meeting.
What we know
Under House Bill 115, low-income defendants would be entitled to an attorney in junk science appeals. The bill would also require the Court of Criminal Appeals to issue a written opinion when a junk science appeal is denied.
The bill would also require the court to consider cases that might not meet procedural requirements. A 2024 report from civil rights group Texas Defender Service showed that 38% of appeals to the court citing junk science were rejected on a procedural basis.
The bar for granting relief would also be lowered to allow relief if there's a reasonable likelihood that the conviction was based on discredited science.
Critics of the law say its current wording essentially forces the convicted person to prove complete innocence.
The changes were among those sparked both by the Texas Defender report and the death row case of Robert Roberson.
What they're saying
"In reality, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals's implementation of the statute has shown inconsistency in application, a disregard for discredited scientific methods, a heavy investigative burden for people seeking relief (especially people without counsel), and a striking absence of relief in capital cases—meaning that potentially innocent people will be executed," Texas Defender said in their report.
What's next
The bill now heads to the Senate, but with the legislative session winding down, it is unknown if it will be heard.
Texas lawmakers made headlines in October after they petitioned to delay Roberson's execution, stating the science behind his execution doesn't hold up.
Roberson was convicted of killing his 2-year-old daughter in Palestine, Texas in 2002.
He took her to the emergency room with a high fever, where medical staff determined her condition was consistent with shaken baby syndrome.
Roberson's attorneys have challenged that diagnosis, calling it "junk science."
They say Nikki died from natural causes, likely undiagnosed pneumonia.
A coalition of lawmakers and the lead detective on the case have argued the science supporting Roberson's death sentence doesn't hold up.
The Texas House Committee on Criminal Jurisprudence issued a subpoena on the day before Roberson's scheduled execution on Oct. 17 for the death row inmate to testify at a hearing about his case. The Supreme Court paused the execution that night to review the committee's request.
An opinion from the Texas Supreme Court in November said that the committee should be allowed to hear his testimony, as long as a subpoena does not block an inevitable execution.
Roberson did not appear at subsequent House committee meetings after the attorney general's office opposed the efforts to bring him to the Capitol building.
The Office of the Attorney General told the State Supreme Court that doing so would present security and logistical concerns.
Some relatives of the 2-year-old have criticized lawmakers for delaying Roberson's execution.
The backstory
Texas' junk science law was the first of its kind in 2013 and a model for other states across the country, according to legal experts. California, Connecticut, Michigan, Nevada and Wyoming have similar "junk science" statutes, but it has not been studied how successful they are at overturning death penalty convictions.
The 2013 law allows a person convicted of a crime to seek relief if the evidence used against them is no longer credible. At the time, it was hailed by the Legislature as a uniquely future-proof solution to wrongful convictions based on faulty science.
No one facing execution has had their sentence overturned since the junk science law was enacted in 2013, according to the Texas Defender Service report.
In the last 10 years, 74 applications have been filed and ruled on under the junk science law. A third of applications were submitted by people facing the death penalty. All of them were unsuccessful.
Of the applications that led to relief, nearly three-quarters were for convictions related to DNA evidence, despite making up less than half of all applications.
The Source
Information on House Bill 115 comes from the May 14, 2025, House session. Information on Texas' junk science law comes from previous FOX 4 coverage. Information on the rates of granted relief comes from a report by civil rights group Texas Defender Service. Backstory on Robert Roberson comes from previous FOX 4 coverage.
