Gov. Greg Abbott is arguing that a Texas House Committee “stepped out of line” in halting the execution of a convicted murderer, asserting that only he has the power to delay executions for additional review.

Robert Roberson, convicted of killing his two-year-old daughter Nikki in 2002, was scheduled for execution last Thursday after exhausting all appeals. A group of 54 Democrat and 32 Republican lawmakers sought to stay the execution, citing concerns over what they called “junk science” used in his conviction. Both the Court of Criminal Appeals and the Board of Pardon and Paroles unanimously rejected the bid to delay the execution.

In a last-minute effort, House Criminal Jurisprudence Committee members—led by Democrat State Rep. Joe Moody of El Paso—subpoenaed Roberson to testify before the committee, raising legal questions about the separation of powers. While a Travis County judge supported the subpoena just hours before Roberson’s scheduled execution and issued a temporary restraining order, the Court of Criminal Appeals quickly struck it down.

Republican State Rep. Jeff Leach of Allen, a member of the committee, then filed a petition with the Texas Supreme Court, claiming to represent the Texas House of Representatives in the matter. The state’s highest civil court granted a stay, halting the execution indefinitely and allowing the committee to hear Roberson’s testimony on Monday.

In a brief filed late Sunday evening and made public Monday, Gov. Greg Abbott’s general counsel James Sullivan argued that only the governor can halt executions.

“In this case…actions by a single committee of a single chamber of the Legislature have had the effect, both legally and factually, of granting (at least) a 90-day reprieve,” Sullivan wrote. “Unless the Court rejects that tactic, it can be repeated in every capital case, effectively rewriting the Constitution to reassign a power given only to the Governor.”

Ultimately, Sullivan noted, the governor has the sole authority to offer a one-time 30-day reprieve unless the Board of Pardon and Paroles recommends otherwise. 

“If the House Committee on Criminal Jurisprudence thinks itself entitled to testimony from a criminal on death row, a point which is not conceded, it could have done so without erasing the authority given exclusively to the Governor. Robert Roberson was convicted over two decades ago,” Sullivan continued.  

“In all that time, even when it was clear that Roberson’s execution date was nearing and the Article 11.073 issue was manifest, the House Committee could not trouble itself with seeking Roberson’s testimony. Only at the eleventh hour, when the Constitution empowers the Governor to make the last move, did the House Committee decide to violate the Separation-of-Powers Clause.”

State Rep. Tony Tinderholt (R-Arlington) has also filed a brief arguing that Leach does not have the authority to represent the House in court without formal approval. In an amicus curiae brief filed with the Texas Supreme Court, Tinderholt pointed out that the House has no statutory authority to file lawsuits or be represented by anyone other than the Office of the Attorney General.

“In his petition, Leach purports to represent the House of Representatives, even though the House lacks statutory authority to initiate a lawsuit or be represented by outside counsel without proper approvals,” wrote Tinderholt in his brief. 

He emphasized that any enforcement of the House’s subpoena power should follow established mechanisms like writs of attachment or prosecution for contempt, as codified in Texas Government Code 301.020(c).

Tinderholt further noted that the Texas Constitution mandates the Attorney General to represent the state in legal matters, with only a few exceptions that require written consent from the Speaker of the House, the Lieutenant Governor, or a resolution passed by both chambers. In this case, he argued, there is no evidence that the Attorney General was consulted or that the Speaker authorized Leach’s actions.

“There is no indication the Attorney General was notified or consulted. Additionally, there is no written approval from the Speaker of the House, nor has there been a House resolution authorizing Leach’s representation,” Tinderholt added. The Attorney General’s office told Texas Scorecard that, to their knowledge, they had not been properly notified. 

Republican State Rep. Brian Harrison, a member of the Criminal Jurisprudence Committee, is among those backing the efforts of Moody and Leach.

“I have a demonstrated track record of opposing House leadership when warranted,” wrote Harrison in a statement to Texas Scorecard. “This is not one of those times. Conservatives must be consistent in our skepticism of government, whose job it is to protect life and liberty, especially when it is going to kill someone. I have been dismayed to see so many Republicans, who clearly don’t know the facts of this case, defend a government system which led to Trump being convicted of 34 felonies.  I will never blindly trust the government.”

None of the other committee members, including Leach, responded to requests for comment.

Brandon Waltens

Brandon serves as the Senior Editor for Texas Scorecard. After managing successful campaigns for top conservative legislators and serving as a Chief of Staff in the Texas Capitol, Brandon moved outside the dome in order to shine a spotlight on conservative victories and establishment corruption in Austin. @bwaltens

RELATED POSTS