Harris County Criminal Lawyers Association

  • Home
    • COVID-19 Court Updates
    • Local Court Information
    • Criminal Law Jobs
  • Membership
    • HCCLA Membership
    • Mentorships
  • About HCCLA
    • Officers & Directors
    • Member Directory
    • Mentorships
    • In Memoriam
    • Bylaws
  • Media
    • Press Releases
    • The Defender
    • Reasonable Doubt 2021
  • Events & Seminars
    • Event Calendar
    • Holiday Party 2024
    • Declaration of Independence Readings
    • HCCLA Annual Banquet & Awards
  • Blog
  • Contact
  • Member Login

Just How Accurate is DNA?

August 7, 2015 1 Comment

Science is an ever-evolving practice. There are very few absolutes. Every scientific result we see in the courtroom is qualified, for example, in a DWI case, we often hear the blood-alcohol level for this defendant is .09, +/- .02. In other cases, we hear DNA matches are quantified as not absolute but rather as 1 in a million chance (or some similar number) of this DNA belonging to someone else.

But what happens with the data used to form the scientific result is riddled with error? DPS would have us believe the error is insignificant, but what is “insignificant” when it comes to life, liberty, and justice?

Recently, prosecutor offices around the state have began to disseminate notices related to errors in the FBI database which almost every lab has used since 1999 to calculate their probability results in DNA matches. Just makes you think, how many other errors are there that have not yet been discovered? These errors only took 15 years to come to light…

Maybe DNA is not quite as accurate as we once thought.

You can view and download the FBI and DPS disclosures here:

Download (PDF, 2.01MB)

 

Filed Under: justice, Public Trust, transparency Tagged With: brady, dna, dna database errors, dps, errors, fbi

parole board’s clemency work should be transparent

August 7, 2015 Leave a Comment

Op-Ed as published in the Houston Chronicle:

Requiring appellate boards to give a written opinion why an applicant’s request was denied a good start
By P. F. McCann Published 4:07 pm, Wednesday, June 17, 2015

The Legislature is done for another 18 months. That means, to paraphrase one 18th-century wit, that for a time, our lives, liberty and property are safe. However, the end of their session is not the end of the fight for fair treatment and open government in the process of pardons and commutations.

Pardons and commutations are an old executive privilege, one that originated as an act of grace from the kings of old. We tossed out kings a long time ago here in Texas, but we kept one of the more moral features of that old system – the right of our elected leadership to dole out mercy. We love our jury trials here, but they often get it wrong, sadly.

That is why we have appellate courts. It is also why we kept the right of leaders to grant reprieve.

Often, one sees that mercy displayed (well, truly, more often it is not displayed) when a person comes up for execution in Texas. At that time, the Board of Pardons and Paroles, in the Executive Clemency section, will vote for or against a recommendation for commuting (an old word meaning, “to change”) a sentence from death to one of life in prison.

The governor can only grant such a request if the board returns a favorable vote, and those are few and far between. I know because my colleagues and I obtained one such recommendation for a condemned man once in 2009. Gov. Rick Perry chose not to grant that request, though he had granted a tiny handful over his years in office. I mention this so that the reader knows I am familiar with the process first-hand, not as an academic study.

His record, and frankly, the board’s, was even more abysmal in terms of granting pardons or commutations on noncapital cases. Every year of his term in office, Perry and the board (all members were appointed by Perry) received hundreds of applications from nonviolent offenders who had served out their time and reformed, or who had been sentenced for heavy terms of years for minor crimes.

Each year, the board routinely rejected the majority of applications for minor technical reasons having nothing to do with the merits, then voted to recommend a small handful of applications, the majority of which the governor then denied.

In 2013, for example, the board received 632 applications for commutations, pardons and restorations of civil rights. The board only voted on one application for commutation out of 106. It recommended denial. Out of 17 applications for pardons based on actual innocence, it recommended zero. Out of 20 applications for conditional pardons it recommended, you guessed it, zero. Out of 300 applications for general pardons, only 44 received a vote from the board recommending relief.

The rest were sent back for reasons unknown, often called “technical compliance.” A total of 46 applications actually got the rare privilege of a recommendation from the board. Of those, Perry granted 12. Twelve. So, about 2 percent of applicants get relief, based on an executive’s whims.

I say whim because the process has always been a complete mystery to all the folks who apply, regardless of whether they have a lawyer’s help. There are no written opinions issued by the board, or public meetings where the debates among the parole board can be heard.

The governor rarely expresses his opinions or reasons for denial except for an occasional good moment of political theater on an execution date. The rules are opaque and the board meets in secret, with no requirement that its decisions or its reasoning even be communicated to the applicant. But it doesn’t have to stay this way. It is time now for a new governor to begin issuing such decisions, and perhaps, to change how the process works.

Our new governor, Greg Abbott, is an attorney and a former judge with a long history of judicial opinion writing. While not all of us in the legal profession always agree on everything, the value of a clear, transparent process and written public opinions as to why a person was refused or granted a commutation or a pardon would be a welcome change from the last two decades of merciless rejection shrouded in the secretive fog that blinds democracy.

That is something this governor can do, and should do now. We should all challenge him to do so, and to open the process once again so that the people of Texas can actually understand how and when mercy is given, or taken away.

McCann is a Houston attorney and a past president of the Harris County Criminal Lawyers Association and the Fort Bend Criminal Lawyers Association.

Filed Under: incarceration, jail, justice, politics, Public Trust, transparency Tagged With: board of pardons and paroles, clemency, commutations, Criminal Justice, executive clemency, government, mercy, pardons, pat mccann, prison, transparency

Nothing To See Here, Move Along People

August 2, 2015 1 Comment

If you’ve been following the David Temple story, you know that Judge Gist found veteran ex-prosecutor Kelly Siegler committed at least 36 instances of misconduct and/or hid evidence. A prosecutor’s duty is to do justice. How can justice be had amongst lies, hidden evidence, and a win at all costs mentality?

Now, lawyers for David Temple have requested the Office of District Attorney, which has accepted no responsibility for prior transgressions by its own, to recuse itself from the continuing legal battle.

Instead of determining whether or not recusal is in the interest of justice, Devon Anderson asks, “Why should I?” In essence she says they have not given her a good reason to recuse her office.

How about Justice? How about Integrity? How about Public Trust? How about Appearance of Impropriety?

We can think of many reasons that seem to escape Ms. Anderson.

Read Ms. Anderson’s response here: 

Download (PDF, 200KB)

Filed Under: appearance of impropriety, honor, justice, politics, prosecutors, Public Trust Tagged With: conflict of interest, Criminal Justice, david temple, devon anderson, fair trial, harris county, Harris County District Attorney, hccla, honor, Improper Conduct, justice, kelly siegler, prosecutorial misconduct, prosecutors

Outrageous Attack on Judge

July 30, 2015 1 Comment

After losing a hearing on the constitutionality of the online solicitation of a minor law this week, the Montgomery County District Attorney’s Office, through its First Assistant Phil Grant, has levied media attacks against Judge Kelly Case for political posture.

“Judge Case continues his one man war on our proactive efforts to protect the children of Montgomery County,” stated First Assistant Grant. “This statute is designed to identify and arrest individuals searching for children online to victimize. The methods and procedures used by our investigators specifically weed out those who are merely engaged in twisted sex talk, and arrests are made only when adults get in their car and drive to a location to meet the minor child. The defendants we arrest have made proactive efforts to find and molest children. Judge Case’s rulings continue to place the children of Montgomery County in danger.”  Breitbart.com July 29, 2015

Phil Grant, who by no coincidence has indicated he will run against Judge Case in the next election cycle, attempts to paint Judge Case as creating a war on the protection of children.

Nothing could be further from the truth!

Using the protection of children as his pawn for political gain, Phil Grant intentionally misleads the media regarding the current state of law in Texas. Rather, Judge Case is following the law of the land in which the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals (the highest court in Texas for criminal cases) has already held sections of this law as over-broad and unconstitutional as it infringes upon the First Amendment’s free speech provision.

Following the realization that this particular law was over-broad and unconstitutional, Senator Joan Huffman (a strong Republican, former prosecutor, and former district court judge) worked hard to introduce and pass new legislation which would presumably cure the error and solidify these types of prosecutions. The Montgomery County District Attorney’s Office supported this new legislation (which takes effect September 15, 2015). They supported it because they knew the law was improperly and unconstitutionally written and needed to be fixed! Now they want to complain that a judge who swore to uphold the Constitution is following the law? That’s absurd. Perhaps this media stance would be different if Mr. Grant had not chosen to run against Judge Case.

Responding to the outrageous attack, the Montgomery County Criminal Defense Lawyers Association issued a statement setting forth the true facts. It can be viewed and downloaded here:

Download (PDF, 169KB)

If you want more information on why the statute is unconstitutional, you should read Mark Bennett’s blog on a Roadmap to the Texas Online Solicitation Statute

HCCLA supports the Montgomery County Criminal Defense Lawyers Association in their response. We too are outraged that the Montgomery County District Attorney would launch such an unwarranted attack to aid its own First Assistant’s political agenda.

Updated Courier media with a response from Phil Grant does not sway our opinion or his agenda.

Filed Under: appearance of impropriety, justice, politics, prosecutors, Public Trust Tagged With: constitution, constitutional law, following the law, free speech, judge kelly case, montgomery county district attorney, online solicitation, phil grant, unwarranted attack, using media for political gain

Clemency Project – Help Needed

July 26, 2015 2 Comments

Lawyers,

Your help is urgently requested.

President Obama has asked criminal defense lawyers from across the country to get clemency petitions before him. Quickly. Time is running out for the President to grant clemency to defendants across the country. There are literally thousands of applications waiting for the attention of a defense attorney to determine whether or not the applicant qualifies for clemency, and if they do, to make the application.

Please, please, please become a part of this historical effort. This goes to the very core of what we do. Non-violent offenders are sitting in jail waiting for you to use the key you hold to unlock the door to their cells and send them home. These defendants are sitting in jail and they do not need to be there any longer, but the opportunity to fix this is quickly disappearing. Please act today.

Get more information here:  https://www.clemencyproject2014.org/

Get started here: https://www.clemencyproject2014.org/volunteers/intro 

There is a two hour training available and assistance at each stage.

We have an opportunity to get involved and be the largest local bar participating. Our lawyers are some of the best in the nation and we can certainly help by joining in.

Nicole DeBorde and Jim Lavine have already started the training.

Here is your chance to get your legal work in from of the President and help a family, one application at a time.

UPDATE: we are hosting a FREE 1 HOUR ETHICS CLE on how to navigate this process and file your petition. Register online for our September 3, 2015 CLE :: noon, 7th floor attorney ready room, Criminal Justice Center, Houston, Texas

Filed Under: incarceration, jail, justice, Members, politics, Public Trust Tagged With: clemency, clemency project 2014, free cle, give back, jim lavine, learn how you can help, nacdl, nicole deborde, president obama, presidential clemency, pro bono work, volunteer

Will the Harris County District Attorney Accept Responsibility?

July 18, 2015 3 Comments

Our clients have problems.

Despite their denial, the Harris County District Attorney has problems as well.

They want our clients to accept responsibility. Will they as well?

In yet another instance, injustice and an appearance of impropriety permeates the Office of District Attorney for Harris County. Apparently, it seems the prosecutor and the bailiff engaged in a series of conversations and text messages about the jury. The importance of this is two-fold: (1) the bailiff, a Harris County Deputy Sheriff, is an officer and arm of the court who is the only person authorized to speak with jurors and (2) the prosecutor is an officer of the court who is forbidden from talking to the jurors. Granted, the prosecutor did not engage in direct communications with the jurors; however, she did attempt to communicate through the bailiff.

She texted the bailiff saying she wished she knew what the jury was thinking. The bailiff responded saying he would find out. THAT IS INAPPROPRIATE. There is no way to spin this so that any part of that conversation was proper and within the rules that require the court (via his bailiff) and the parties (via the prosecutor) to avoid the appearance of impropriety.

So what’s the big deal? Well, the thing is this is just one of many instances – all seemingly small – which cast doubt on the ability to have a fair trial in Harris County.

When will Devon Anderson accept responsibility? She didn’t in her response to our request about Dan Rizzo and the Alfred Brown case. She didn’t in an inquiry about prosecutor’s Connie Spence and Craig Goodhart threatening witnesses. She hasn’t in her media responses to the Kelly Siegler findings of prosecutorial misconduct. And, she hasn’t here. What will it take?

 

Filed Under: appearance of impropriety, honor, justice, police, politics, prosecutors, Public Trust Tagged With: alfred dwayne brown, appearance of impropriety, bailiff, cell phone, criminal defense, Criminal Justice, Dan Rizzo, devon anderson, district attorney, fair trial, fundamental fairness, harris county, Harris County District Attorney, harris county sheriff, hccla, honor, Improper Conduct, justice, kelly siegler, lawyers, perception, prosecutorial misconduct, prosecutors

Prosecutorial Misconduct Must Be Addressed

July 14, 2015 1 Comment

Sadly, Harris County District Attorney Devon Anderson has declined our request calling for an investigation into former prosecutor Dan Rizzo’s conduct in the Alfred Brown case.

She cites expired statutes of limitations (the time in which a criminal charge or grievance can be brought).

Download (PDF, 365KB)

Though the prosecutor has declined any follow-up, we remain vigilant in our investigation into what appears to be yet another instance of prosecutorial misconduct.

When a person takes steps to conceal their behavior, the statute is tolled, and it seems clear that Mr. Rizzo did just that: he concealed exculpatory evidence, he colluded with a cop to intimidate a witness and then falsely charge that witness in a criminal case, and he used the veil of grand jury secrecy to carry out his witness intimidation.

The State Bar has already established new rules for bringing grievances, even years later, where a prosecutor commits misconduct, and the time for filing the grievance now runs from the time of discovery. So much of this tragedy, while occurring years ago, has just recently been discovered.

This is such a blatant attempt to dodge responsibility that it should, along with her statement today regarding the pending decision about prosecutorial misconduct by Ms. Siegler,* result in the consideration of a possible court of inquiry as former prosecutor Ken Anderson faced in the wake of the Michael Morton tragedy. (*Devon Anderson was quoted as saying, “Any actions such as reopening an investigation into this case would be premature.”)

Filed Under: honor, incarceration, justice, police, politics, prosecutors, Public Trust Tagged With: alfred brown, court of inquiry, Dan Rizzo, devon anderson, former prosecutor, grand jury secrecy, grievance, harris county, kelly siegler, ken anderson, prosecutorial misconduct

Hollywood: Cold INjustice

July 11, 2015 Leave a Comment

Chronicle Editorial Hits Nail on the Head: Hollywood ending, A potentially innocent man sat behind bars so that a prosecutor could get on television.

“an awful lot of razzle dazzle for the serious business that goes down in criminal courtrooms”

Some prosecutors forget. Some never know it to begin with. But, criminal courtrooms are serious business. Life and liberty (for all) are at stake. Criminal courtrooms mean much more than their civil counterparts who fight over money.

It is interesting that most people do not care about the criminal justice justice system; most do not care if rights are trampled; most have no idea innocent people can be convicted; until it happens to them or a family member.

For over 21 years, Kelly Siegler (a Harris County Assistant District Attorney) played fast and loose with the rules. She used the courtroom as her stage for theatrics. Yes, she was aggressive, and that’s ok, as long as it is fair. Hiding evidence is not fair. Subpoenaing witnesses under a different case to hide the witness is not fair. Lying to the court is not fair. Interfering with public information requests is not fair. Continuing to hide evidence long after you no longer work as a prosecutor is not fair.

Just as there are bad influences in every profession, Kelly has marred the reputation of prosecutors, even those who do seek justice. It’s easy to be fair. A web of lies and deceit do nothing for our system of justice, except create injustice.

Filed Under: honor, jail, justice, politics, prosecutors, Public Trust, Reasonable Doubt Tagged With: cold justice, criminal defense, devon anderson, dick deguerin, district attorney, harris county, Harris County District Attorney, hccla, honor, Improper Conduct, injustice, justice, kelly siegler, lawyers

McSpadden Battles Jail Overcrowding

July 9, 2015 1 Comment

Today, Senior District Court Judge Michael McSpadden shared his thoughts with Senator John Whitmire regarding jail overcrowding.

While we do not always agree on each issue, we applaud Judge McSpadden for his efforts in pushing for reduction in low-level drug offenses which would clearly have a major impact on our local jail overcrowding. Rather than shipping inmates out of county for holding, pending court (meaning they have not been convicted of anything), had the legislature reduced the “trace” cocaine cases to misdemeanor class C offenses, a substantial portion of those awaiting trial would be released so that courts, law enforcement, and prosecutors could focus on more serious offenses and more violent offenders. Additionally, barring a legislative change, elected District Attorney Devon Anderson could exercise her prosecutorial discretion to serve the same purpose.

Jail overcrowding is a problem. It must be fixed. Shipping inmates around the state for housing is not the answer.

Thanks to Judge McSpadden for at least attacking the problem and offering viable solutions. Read Judge McSpadden’s correspondence here:

 

Download (PDF, 80KB)

Filed Under: incarceration, jail, justice, politics, prosecutors, Public Trust Tagged With: devon anderson, district attorney, harris county, Harris County District Attorney, harris county sheriff, jail overcrowding, overcriminalization, pretrial detainees, ron hickman, senator john whitmire, trace cocaine cases

Egregious Prosecutorial Conduct

July 9, 2015 1 Comment

David Temple, the innocent man Kelly Siegler finally convicted, may finally get a new trial. In his 19-page findings of fact, Judge Gist notes at least 36 instances of prosecutorial misconduct; he paints a picture of a prosecutor willing to win at any cost and failing to follow her duty to disclose, or timely disclose, evidence favorable to the defense. Siegler, he notes, testified she didn’t need to turn over the evidence because she didn’t believe it was true.

The prosecutor’s personal belief in the truth of the favorable evidence can never be the benchmark for what prosecutors must disclose. Almost always, the Brady information which must be disclosed will be contrary to the prosecutor’s case or at least at issue with a portion of their case. But that’s exactly why it must be disclosed; defense attorneys are entitled to explore and investigate that information which may tend to exculpate their client. Defense attorneys are entitled to information which could harm the prosecutor’s case or cast doubt upon their witnesses. That’s been the law for decades. Certainly, if a prosecutor were to believe the information, her duty would be not only to disclose the information but also to dismiss the prosecution.

Read more from the Houston Chronicle: Judge Finds Fault with Legendary Local Prosecutor

HCCLA in the news criticizing ex-prosecutor Kelly Siegler’s conduct in the David Temple murder case (excerpts here):

Gist made his findings after a 10-week hearing that began in December, in which attorneys Stanley Schneider and Casie Gotro questioned prosecutors, investigators and defense attorneys about what happened throughout the murder trial. The two took over Temple’s appeal from DeGuerin.

“The evidence supports the findings,” Schneider said. “I feel relieved. The next step is getting David a new trial.”

Commenting on Siegler’s conduct outlined in the judicial findings, trial attorney dick DeGuerin is quoted:

“I think it’s bad, and I think she ought to be held accountable,” Dick DeGuerin said. “But I’m going to let someone else decide that.”

On behalf of HCCLA,

JoAnne Musick, president of the Harris County Criminal Lawyers Association, said Gist’s findings show “egregious” conduct.

The organization of defense attorneys is reviewing transcripts of the hearing to determine if a grievance should be filed.

“Whether it’s Morton or Graves or whoever, we see prosecutors who want to win, so they don’t want to disclose everything,” Musick said. “If they’re hiding things or playing games, that’s not upholding their duty to do justice. That’s trying to win.”

One of Temple’s attorneys who spent days questioning Siegler blasted the former prosecutor:

“Charles Sebesta was just disbarred for this same kind of conduct,” said Casie Gotro. “Dick DeGuerin stood on the courthouse steps and told the world Kelly Siegler had finally convicted an innocent man. These findings reveal exactly how she did it.”

This is certainly one story that will continue as Judge Gists’ findings are forwarded to the Court of Criminal Appeals for review.

The Houston Press is following this story as well, read more (excerpts here):

Prosecutors “intentionally, deliberately, or negligently failed to disclose” investigators’ reports and witness statements that pointed to other suspects, but Siegler continued the suppression even following the conviction, according to the findings.

Siegler testified in the habeas hearing that potential exculpatory evidence didn’t need to be disclosed if prosecutors “did not believe it was true,” according to the findings.

Gist also wrote that Siegler influenced post-trial maneuvers by telling police and officials within the DA’s Office not to disclose public records if they were requested. The findings also state that Siegler continued to pull strings even after leaving the DA’s Office in 2008, after 21 years, by getting an alleged witness who approached DeGuerin after the trial to change his story.

In that situation, Daniel Glasscock gave DeGuerin a sworn statement that he overheard another man implicate himself in the murder. Glasscock passed a polygraph administered by the DA’s Office and also gave the same story to a DA’s investigator.

But Siegler “asked” a Harris County Sheriff’s deputy — who was involved with the trial investigation — to contact Glassock and another witness “before they could be contacted by the Special Prosecutor [in the habeas investigation] or current members of the District Attorney’s Office. The Deputy did so and afterwards, their stories were significantly different than the original version,” according to the finding.

“In substance, Glasscock repudiated the most important details to the extent that his future credibility as a witness is significantly impaired,” Gist wrote.

Houston attorney Paul Looney, who worked on Temple’s case before DeGuerin took over, told theHouston Press that Siegler’s ultimate goal was to use the case as leverage to get her own TV reality series — an idea she had unsuccessfully pitched once before.

Siegler then asked to take over the Temple case, which had been languishing for years because the original grand jury chose not to indict.

“This was her opportunity to enhance her resume to the point where she would get her TV show,” Looney said. “It worked, she got the show (“Cold Justice” on TNT). But boy, at what a price. At the price of David Temple’s life, at the price of an entire family’s reputation, and at the price of her own integrity.”

As for Siegler’s impression of exculpatory evidence, Looney said, “If Kelly’s bizarre interpretation of that rule were ever to be the law, then all a prosecutor would ever have to do to keep any witness statement away from the defense is say, ‘Well, I didn’t believe it, so I didn’t give it to the defense.’ That’s never been the law, it would totally eliminate law, but she just boldly stated it — and the only thing I can figure is she’s trying to find some arguable basis to try to defend her law license from the ultimate scrutiny of the State Bar of Texas, which undoubtedly is going to happen over this case.”

But Looney alleged that Siegler not only violated professional ethical standards, but that she committed a felony by obstructing justice.

“If Kelly Siegler’s a lawyer in five years, I’ll be shocked,” Looney said. “And if she’s not a felon in five years, it’ll be because [District Attorney] Devon Anderson decided to protect her own friend.”

Pulitzer Prize winning journalist Lisa Falkenberg hits the nail on the head with her column: Judge is Right: Prosecutor Didn’t Live Up to Her Duty

The prosecutor’s duty is to seek justice, not win at all costs. Her “ego” wouldn’t let her lose this cold case. Cited twice now, once by the appellate court and now by the habeas judge, Kelly’s conduct is egregious and intentional as she hid evidence, failed to disclose evidence, and lied to the court about the evidence.

Filed Under: honor, justice, Members, politics, prosecutors, Public Trust Tagged With: casie gotro, criminal defense, dick deguerin, ethical violations, harris county, hccla, Improper Conduct, joanne musick, justice, kelly siegler, prosecutors, stanley schneider

  • « Previous Page
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • Next Page »

Helpful Links & Resources

  • Seminars & Events
    • Speakers Bureau: Request a Speaker
  • Court Info & Policies
  • Harris County Managed Assigned Counsel (MAC)
  • Guide to ePLEA
  • HCCLA Ethics Hotline 713.518.1738
Harris County Criminal Lawyers Association (HCCLA)

Important Links

  • Bylaws
  • HCCLA Membership
  • Join HCCLA
  • Media
  • HCCLA Blog

Upcoming Events

  • 16th Annual Reading: Declaration of Independence
    Thu Jul 3 2025, 11:00am CDT

Contact Us

Harris County Criminal Lawyers Association
P.O. Box 924523
Houston, TX 77292-4523
(713) 227-2404

    

Copyright © 2025 · Harris County Criminal Lawyers Association. The HCCLA logo is a registered trademark.