Paxton Wins Court Battle Over Lawmaker Attempt to Halt Execution of Child’s Killer

AUSTIN, TX - Attorney General Ken Paxton successfully stopped an attempt by activists and a handful of State legislators to create a precedent allowing for a legislative committee to delay execution, settling a critical Constitutional question and ensuring justice for the two-year-old murder victim in the 2002 case.

Robert Roberson was convicted of murdering his two-year-old daughter in 2002 and is scheduled to be executed in October 2024. In an unprecedented procedural maneuver intended to end-run the State Constitution and delay his execution, members of the Texas House issued a subpoena calling the convicted murderer to testify in front of their committee on a date after the execution was to take place.

The legislative committee then sued to enforce their subpoena, doubling down on their unconstitutional effort to interfere with his death sentence. Now, the Texas Supreme Court has ruled that the subpoena issued by a Texas House Committee may not interfere with a lawfully ordered execution, writing, “Legislative investigatory power, even at its maximum, is insufficient to forestall a long-scheduled execution under the circumstances presented here.”

Attorney General Paxton said, “The rule of law prevailed against bad-faith political actors who schemed to undermine the justice system in Texas. Jeff Leach and his associates violated the separation of powers enshrined in the Texas Constitution: they conspired to block the lawful execution of a man convicted of murdering his two-year-old daughter, Nikki. Ensuring justice for murder victims is one of my most sacred responsibilities as Attorney General, and we fought every step of the way for her.” 

The process was fraught with other incidences of impropriety. While the matter was pending before the courts, Representative Jeff Leach, the chairman of the House Committee on Judiciary and Civil Jurisprudence, publicly confessed to violating the law and committing a breach of ethics by sending “ex parte” communications in an attempt to improperly influence a sitting Judge on the Court of Criminal Appeals. 

To read the decision, click here.