Ex parte Robbins (Texas CCA 2013)
Ex parte Robbins (Tex. Crim. App. 2013): Relief for Convictions Based on False Science
Texas now allows challenges when forensic evidence has been discredited.
Background
Neal Robbins was convicted of capital murder based largely on expert testimony that a child’s death was caused by asphyxiation. Years later, the medical examiner recanted, stating the death was likely accidental. Robbins sought habeas relief, arguing that the conviction rested on false or scientifically invalid evidence.
Questions Presented
- Can a defendant obtain relief when key trial evidence is later shown to be scientifically unsound?
Majority Opinion — Judge Cathy Cochran
Holding: Convictions obtained using false or outdated forensic science may violate due process, even if the prosecution did not act in bad faith.
The Court acknowledged that science evolves — and criminal justice must evolve with it. If the foundation of a conviction collapses, fairness demands reexamination. Robbins led to Texas enacting Article 11.073 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, allowing post-conviction relief based on new scientific evidence.
In Montgomery County, this applies to shaken baby cases, bite-mark evidence, flawed DNA interpretation, and forensic disciplines later debunked. Wrongful convictions are not theoretical — they happen. Robbins gives Texans a path to expose and correct them.