Police officials say Stephens’ allegations are unfounded and maintain their lab work is on the up-and-up. “It has become apparent that Ms. Stephens is an angry former employee and is now looking to bring discredit to the Austin Police Department’s crime lab,” according to the Assistant Police Chief Sean Mannix.

The basis of Stephens’ complaint is that drug evidence is not being analyzed before reports are being submitted to the District Attorney’s office. In particular, she states that drug evidence in fast-tracked cases is not being tested and instead, lab workers are saying the substance is a controlled substance without scientific validation.

It’s not completely uncommon for police to misidentify drugs or to believe something is a controlled substance when it isn’t, merely because of the similar appearance of the evidence. If the mistake isn’t caught by the scientists in the crime lab, such a mistake could result in jail time for someone who is otherwise innocent.

Stephens alleges “results are being reported and charges are being filed without any analysis being conducted at all.” She says she believes hundreds of cases analyzed by the crime lab since 2005 were done “without regard to laboratory protocols.”

According to the department, Stephens was fired for violating policies and procedures; further clarification is not being made public. Her initial complaints, forwarded to the national accrediting organization and to the Texas Forensic Science Commission were said to be baseless, according to those organizations.

In a similar case, a former lab analyst complained on the integrity of the DNA lab. That lab was then investigated by the DPS and the FBI, both of which found no deficiencies. The DPS and the Texas Rangers both cleared that lab of wrongdoing in the investigation.

The impact of Stephens’ allegations are yet unknown, though the department believes they are all without merit. A deputy assistant director of the lab sent a letter addressing Stephens’ complaints, however, and stated that they identified two cases where no drug testing was done before a report was emailed to prosecutors.

When you are charged with a crime and there is physical evidence involved, the integrity of the agency tasked with handling that evidence should be verified. If there is any question to the methods of evaluation and handling used by that agency, your defense lawyer could use those questions as a basis to challenge the evidence’s admissibility.

Contact our offices today to discuss the evidence against you and how it could affect the outcome of your case.

It’s not often, perhaps never, that defense lawyers investigate a prosecutor. However, Morton’s legal team was given this chance by Judge Sid Harle, who took over the case in August. It’s believed when all is said and done, the defense team will ask Harle to take some sort of action against Anderson, though what that action is isn’t known yet.

Several states have innocence commissions in place to investigate and prevent wrongful convictions. These are the bodies that would normally handle the investigation into any missteps by the prosecution in such an exoneration case. But Bennett Gershman, a professor at Pace University, says that this is the first time that he knows of an investigation being led by defense lawyers.

Morton had some pretty high profile defense lawyers on his side, Barry Scheck and Nina Morrison with the Innocence Project of New York, and Gerry Goldstein from San Antonio, just to name a few.

According to the Statesman, the defense team has been “admittedly making the rules as they go.” The team was granted the ability to conduct “limited discovery” by the current district attorney, John Bradley. Using that power more commonly seen in civil cases, the lawyers subpoenaed testimony from Anderson, Mike Davis (who assisted as an ADA on Morton’s case), and Don Wood, the retired sheriff’s deputy who was involved in the murder investigation.

Morton’s team is expected to go before judge Harle next Monday and reveal what exactly it is that they’ve found. There are indications that Anderson had evidence that was “favorable” to Morton’s case and neglected to divulge this evidence early on in the case. Disclosing such evidence is required by law.

In specific, there are four pieces of evidence that Morton’s lawyers believe Anderson knew about and withheld:

• A report that Morton’s wife’s credit cards were used in San Antonio 2 days after her death (pointing to a robbery motive),
• Indications that a check made out to Christine Morton was cashed 9 days after she was killed,
• A police report indicating there had been a suspicious van in the neighborhood whose driver had walked up behind the Morton house on “several occasions,” and
• “The transcript of a police interview with Christine Morton’s mother…who revealed that the Mortons’ 3 –year-old son witnessed the murder and said Michael Morton was not home at the time.”

What Judge Harle does with this information remains to be seen.

When you are accused of a crime, even if it’s a misdemeanor, you need someone looking out for your best interest, helping to ensure your rights are protected and that any and all evidence that can assist your case is brought out into the open.

If you’ve been accused of a criminal offense, contact our offices today to discuss your case.

The old facility had 1,000 beds that were eliminated from the total bed count of the Texas Department of Corrections. But now, Texas has more than 2,000 beds more than it did just a year ago. So, what good did the closure do? In reality, it was purely fiscal.

It’s all about saving money these days and while we often see positive criminal justice reform pushed on the basis of saving money, the Texas justice system keeps adding more and more convicts to the mix. Unless lawmakers are willing to change how the machine works, they will continue to funnel inmates into a system that simply can’t afford them.

“At some point, because of the costs, we have to recognize that we don’t need to waste one dollar incarcerating one person that doesn’t really need to be behind bars,” says Senator John Whitmore (D-Houston).

According to the American Statesman, 35% of Texas inmates are serving time for nonviolent offenses. In order to significantly impact the amount of money needed to keep the system running, we have to reduce the amount of people in prison. Obviously, the smartest way to do this would be to reduce penalties for nonviolent offenses or to “limit local judges’ discretion to mete out long prison sentences for nonviolent crimes.”

Still, no one wants to seem soft on crime and the chances of such broad changes are pretty slim.

So far in an effort to save money after $60 million was taken from prison spending this year, many changes have been made, none of which affect the number of people behind bars.

• Inmates pay $100/year for medical care, up from $3 per visit
• 200 Medical workers lost their jobs as hours were cut in prison clinics
• Two meals per day are served on weekends and dessert is only provided once per week
• Rehabilitation and treatment programs have been siginificantly downsized
• More than 1,500 employees have been laid off
• Probation and Parole officers have higher than ever caseloads
• Manufacturing plants within prisons have been closed

So rather than impacting the cause of the spending (the number of inmates) we are reducing the quality of the incarceration experience. In other words, we are making prison time harder—something “tough on crime” folks would love to hear even though it is shown to increase recidivism and border on unethical.

Until lawmakers get the courage to stand up for what works (rehabilitation and community supervision for nonviolent offenders), we will likely see similar cuts in the future. Perhaps they will get rid of heat and air conditioning next. It’s fairly certain that you won’t see local judges spare convicts a prison sentence of their own accord in order to help with the issue.

So, if you are facing criminal charges, you can’t bank on a lenient judge or significant changes to sentencing laws. Instead, you have to depend on a criminal lawyer and the laws that are currently in place. Contact our offices today if you are facing charges. We may be able to help.

When the Sheriff’s Office receives a warrant from an officer, ideally that warrant would be entered in the system right away. This would allow any officer across the state who may do a traffic stop, for instance, to check the database and immediately know a suspect had an outstanding warrant. Though that’s what happens in most counties across the state, Harris County can’t seem to keep up.

According to the Houston Chronicle, the Sheriff employs three clerks whose sole job is to enter warrants in the database. Currently, those clerks are forced to prioritize the warrants, entering those for serious offenses like rape, murder, or those especially requested by officers to be entered immediately.

Though Sheriff Adrian Garcia requested additional funds to hire more clerks, that request was denied. Another agency, in Bexar County, had a similar problem a few years ago and solved their issue by increasing staff.

Harris County receives about 3,000 warrants per month and current staffing levels simply can’t keep up with the nonstop flow of such warrants. Those Class A and B misdemeanor warrants could sit for a significant amount of time before they are ever entered, potentially affecting the cases down the road and, the Sheriff worries, public safety.

According to the Chronicle, however, this isn’t just a recent problem. The agency has had backlog to some degree for the last 20 years. Other law enforcement agencies within the area are aware of the problem, though the Sheriff says he never explicitly told anyone.

It doesn’t seem that there is any immediate solution to the problem, unless the flow of warrants suddenly slows or if the department gets additional staff. In the meantime, they will continue to prioritize, entering the most serious warrants first while non-family violence misdemeanors take the lowest priority.

This doesn’t mean it’s time to celebrate if you are one of the thousands whose warrant has not been entered. There’s always a chance that a local law enforcement officer knows your warrant exists without it being in the system. Also, these warrants will eventually be entered, so you are not off scot-free.

If you believe you have an outstanding warrant, for failure to appear or any reason and are in need of legal counsel, contact our offices today to discuss your case.

Arson investigations involve careful consideration of evidence. The study of how fire burns, what ignites it, where it starts, and similar questions are complicated indeed. But we know more about it now than ever. In the past there was nothing more than an oral tradition of arson investigation, where prior investigators would pass-down pointers to new investigators and the torch of questionable practices would be passed.

Now, the actual science of arson investigations has discredited much of what was seen as fact just 20 years ago, though it was too late for Willingham, who was executed in 1991 for starting the fire that killed his two young children.

The state fire marshal’s office has agreed this week to look into prior arson convictions to determine if shoddy science and bad practices were used. The review was sought by the Texas Forensic Science Commission, the commission which determined the investigators in Willingham’s case relied on “scientifically invalid techniques” to gain a conviction in that case.

Some are very happy about the marshal’s agreement to review the cases. After all, he’s not legally required to do so. “But there is some ethical and moral duty to do that,” said Commission Chairman Nizam Peerwani.

The marshal’s office has agreed to review those cases where investigators from the agency offered testimony at trial. But the sheer number of cases this would involve is remarkable, so they asked for help. The Innocence Project of Texas will be assisting in determining which cases warrant a closer look, though officials from this esteemed organization aren’t getting too excited about the planned review as of yet.

“The fire marshal’s continued faith in the arson evidence in the Willingham cases keeps me from having faith in his judgment,” said Innocence Project’s policy director Stephen Saloom. “And frankly, it should worry the commission.”

Is the marshal just trying to save face and satisfy the commission without really making an effort to uncover flawed cases? The office did stick by all of the flawed science and hastily made assumptions made in the Willingham case, so it’s easy to see why Saloom is being cautious in his optimism.

Arson laws in Texas are extremely serious. The science of analyzing how fires start and spread has come a long way. If you are charged with arson, you want to be confident that you are given a fair shot at beating the charges. Contact our offices today to discuss your case.

Texas lawmakers created the Texas Forensics Science Commission six years ago to hear complaints about bad science, bad policy, and other various problems within Texas crime labs. They were brought together to bring some integrity to the labs, ensuring proper justice was meted out.

The ASCLD/LAB is the accreditation agency that Dallas’ lab belongs to. Although they’ve asked administrators about the various complaints, officials from the Dallas County Crime Lab always had an explanation.

In one situation, Nulf alerted officials that the lab was using chemicals that expired more than 3 years prior. When confronted with this information, the lab told the ASCLD/LAB that because the chemicals were only a part of a greater solution being used in the lab, it didn’t matter when it expired. Basically, if the total solution passed quality control, it was fine. Or as DMagazine puts it, “it was using spoiled meat, but the chili still tasted fine.”

Another concern of Nulf’s was the use of a box fan in a room containing blood evidence. The potential for contamination by airborne particles is great. But officials told the ASCLD/LAB that the fan was always pointed away from any evidence and therefore was another non-issue.

Nulf eventually lost his job in May 2009 because he insisted on saying that he used an expired chemical when making notations in the lab logbook. He filed a wrongful termination suit but had to drop the suit because it was filed outside of 7 days following his termination, the deadline per county policy.

Evidence handling procedures must be adhered to strictly. But if procedures are unclear or if lab workers are told different procedures by different supervisors, running a lab that the people can depend on is nearly impossible. Problematic practices can result in the guilty walking free, whether it is on murder charges or sex offenses, and perhaps more troubling, the innocent being convicted.

When you are charged with a criminal offense, it’s the job of your defense lawyer to examine all of the evidence against you. From analyzing how it was collected to how it was handled, your lawyer helps to ensure you get the best results possible on your case.

From TV shows like CSI and Bones, we expect hyper-competent expert scientific crime analysis, but reality falls far short of this standard. These systemic flaws from a lazy, underfunded, and sometimes incompetent system stand in the way of criminal justice.

The prison was made famous by the folk song “Midnight Special”, written by singer Huddie “Lead Belly” Ledbetter during the 1920s. The song referred to a train shining its light into a jail cell, alluding to the private rail line that crosses through the prison grounds, a rail that may cause issues when the state sells the land.

Just a few months ago the prison had 900 inmates and now it’s down to 80 as the state works to empty it. The age of the facility, combined with financial concerns, and a significant drop in inmate numbers statewide all contributed to the decision to shut the facility down.

Convict numbers, according to the American Statesman, are at the lowest rate in decades. Statewide the crime rate is at its lowest since 1973, a significant achievement. Similar drops in crime have been seen across the country with many theories as to why.

Also, there has been some shift away from the tough-on-crime mentality that has cemented Texas as the prison capital of the country. The perfect storm of low crime and lack of money has forced some lawmakers to reexamine their heavy handed views in favor of rehabilitation and community supervision. Republicans and Democrats alike have moved toward a new attitude in sentencing and punishment.

House Corrections Committee Chairman Jerry Madden, a Republican and the “architect” of these changes says “From where Texas was just a few short years ago, this is huge.”

But the Sugar Land Central Unit isn’t the only institution that’s experiencing a shift. Three youth facilities have recently been emptied, the first three state owned youth facilities to be closed. Again, the closures are due to budget downsizing and a shift in thinking. The Texas Youth Commission will be merged into the new Texas Department of Juvenile Justice next year and with it will come a focus on community corrections and alternatives to incarceration.

A low crime rate and decreases in prison capacities due to closures won’t immediately affect those penalties being meted out in court, however. Unless legislative changes are made, courtroom justice will remain swift and sometimes severe, something those charged with crimes know all too well.

When you are facing criminal charges in Texas, whether for drugs or assault, you must be prepared for the worst case scenario but hopeful for the best. A local criminal defense lawyer can help ensure you get the best results possible on your day in court, potentially avoiding the worst penalties.

If you are facing charges, contact our Texas defense lawyers today to speak with an attorney about your case.

Sixty percent of the children were kicked out of school on a temporary or permanent basis between the 7^th and 12^th grades. In California, that number was 13%; in Florida it was 9%.

NPR states 15% of those Texas children were disciplined repeatedly, 11 times or more and “half of them ended up in juvenile-justice facilities or programs for an average of 73 schooldays.” That begs the question, how does school discipline affect a child’s propensity towards criminal behavior?

The problem, experts say, is the decision to discipline a child by suspension or expulsion is made by a teacher or sole administrator. There are not checks and balances and some have begun using suspension as the first line of defense rather than the last.

Research shows that institutionalization can occur at young ages in juvenile detention facilities. That is, a child can become accustomed to being locked up and can, whether consciously or not, seek out the circumstances that will lead them back to incarceration. Can the same be said for suspension? It’s not out of the realm of possibilities that a child could become accustomed to being excluded or banished, in the same manner that they are separated when institutionalized.

It seems schools are using these tougher sanctions now more than ever. Since 2005, it’s said that only 3% of suspensions and expulsions involved drugs or weapons. So for 97% of cases, suspension or expulsion was not mandated by law, simply seen as justified by the sole decision maker in that particular case.

The problem with that is that it’s led to disproportionate applications of these most severe disciplinary practices. According to the study 70% of black girls who were tracked were suspended or expelled. Only 37% of white girls faced the same fate, for the same offenses. The school superintendent of Plano Texas, Doug Otto, admitted that racial prejudice is involved.

A child’s success in life is often determined by the quality of their education. If they are made to feel like they are not good enough to go to school, what would keep them from pursuing a more lucrative life of crime?

Your child’s downward spiral may have begun in the schools and now he/she could be facing serious criminal charges. If you or your child is facing charges in Texas, get a free consultation with a criminal defense attorney.

The SWIFT program (Supervision With Intensive enForcemenT) is designed to stop probationers before their probation violations send them to prison. It’s an intermediate sanction program that intervenes immediately when there are problems with an offender’s compliance and seeks to sort of shock them back into successful probation.

Typically, if a probationer violates the terms of their supervision, their supervising officer may increase their sanctions while under supervision, requiring more visits or community service hours, for instance. If the violation is serious or if there are several, the officer can seek a probation revocation hearing where the offender may get sent to prison, activating the initial sentence they received.

Through the SWIFT program, a violation will land you in jail. Immediately, but only for a short time. Though this will require more jail space from the county initially, it’s hoped the intensive program will reduce recidivism and those probationers who are eventually violated and sent to prison in the long run.

Judge Westfall states that offenders have learned how to work the system. They’ve learned just what violations they can accrue and what their sanctions will likely be. They know they are more likely to face more frequent PO meetings than a revocation hearing, particularly during these times of overwhelmed parole officers and crowded court dockets. She hopes the SWIFT program will bring them back into compliance, equating the program to “child rearing.”

Currently the program is only being piloted in Tarrant County. It’s unfunded for now and there were only be around 10 probationers added per month, for charges like drug possession. The county is hoping for a federal grant, one which is giving $850,000 to four states who choose to replicate the original Hawaiian program. This would allow for about 400 probationers to take part in SWIFT and a chance to see just how effective it can be.

Probation violations can occur because of positive drug screens, missing appointments with your supervising officer, committing new criminal offenses, or violating any other terms listed on your probation contract. Typically a probation officer will use progressive sanctions to gain compliance before seeking a revocation hearing.

When compared with prison time, probation is a walk in the park. But probation is considered a privilege and can be revoked for noncompliance. Whether you are facing criminal charges and hope to get probation in lieu of jail time or if you are facing a probation revocation hearing—we can help. Contact our attorneys today to discuss the specifics of your case.

Dallas changed their procedures two years ago, though they were the only major department in the state to do so. The change was met with some resistance from officers who believed the old way of doing things was just fine. However, the department adjusted and officials there believe they are the better for it.

For the past several decades, police would bring a witness in and show them a group of photos. They would ask the witness to identify the person of interest, if that person could be found in the group of photos. The main problem with this method, it seems, is that the witnesses would compare the photos to one another, often choosing the one that most resembled the suspect rather than the one that was the suspect.

Now, under the new law and according to what Dallas has been doing for the past few years, photos are shown one at a time in a consecutive manner. This, experts say, allows the witness to compare photos to the memory of the suspect, rather than to the other photos.

A lot happens when a witness is tasked with identifying a suspect from a photo lineup. As this article from NPR details, both spoken and unspoken communications between the officer and the witness can influence greatly the outcome of the meeting. Any doubt or questioning sound in the voice of an officer can cause the witness to second guess their gut feeling and what their memory is telling them about the suspect, rendering the lineup and potential identification undependable.

Even telling the witness that “the suspect you are looking for may not be present in the photos” can help reduce the likelihood that the witness will choose an innocent person. They don’t feel like they “have” to find someone when this disclaimer is included.

According to NPR, about 25% of departments across the nation have changed their lineup procedures to reflect these better practices. But like any major changes to police procedure, things like this take time. Only nine years ago, nearly every department was doing the lineups the “old fashioned” way, with little thought to how the officers’ actions might influence the witness’ id.

Even with these changes, mistakes are made. When it comes to DNA exonerations, false witness identification played a role in the majority of cases. And these are only the cases that we know about. Innocent people are accused of crimes and in some instances even convicted of crimes.

If you are charged with a criminal offense that you did not commit you need an experienced advocate on your side. Even if you admit your role in a criminal offense but feel like the police are taking the charges too far, we may be able to help. Contact our attorneys today for a free consultation on a criminal charge in Texas.