The Supreme Court declined to intervene in the scheduled execution of Robert Roberson, who was set to be executed by lethal injection in Texas for the 2002 death of his two-year-old daughter, Nikki. Prosecutors claimed that Nikki died from shaken baby syndrome, a controversial diagnosis related to brain injuries. Roberson maintained that he is innocent, asserting that new evidence indicates Nikki died from double pneumonia exacerbated by a fall from her bed.
Justice Sonia Sotomayor, commenting on the court’s decision, highlighted that cases like Roberson’s, where actual innocence is seriously asserted, warrant urgent attention. However, she concluded that there was no federal legal basis for the Supreme Court to intervene, leaving Roberson’s hope resting with Texas Governor Greg Abbott for a reprieve.
Just prior to the Supreme Court’s decision, a Texas judge had temporarily halted the execution. A bipartisan group of lawmakers in Texas also subpoenaed Roberson to testify before the Texas House Committee on Judiciary and Jurisprudence next week, a move that the state attorney general has indicated will be appealed.
In the week leading up to her death, Nikki suffered from a serious respiratory infection, presenting with a high fever. On the day of her passing, she fell out of bed, and Roberson noticed she had stopped breathing when he woke up. After being taken to the hospital, doctors identified brain swelling and bleeding, which at the time led to the assumption of shaken baby syndrome as a cause.
Roberson argues that this diagnosis has been discredited, and that advancements in understanding now indicate Nikki’s death was due to severe pneumonia that progressed to sepsis. He claims that the response to his case has effectively barred him from having his evidence heard in court.
Brian Wharton, the lead investigator in Nikki’s case, has since expressed significant doubts about Roberson’s guilt, stating that investigators did not explore alternatives to shaken baby syndrome. Additionally, a group of 86 Texas lawmakers has voiced support for Roberson, calling for at least a new trial under a Texas law allowing for challenges to convictions based on flawed scientific evidence.
The state of Texas countered that Roberson has not proven his innocence and that the medical evidence does not support his claims. They maintained that the Supreme Court has no authority to mandate detailed explanations from state courts regarding procedural decisions.
In a brief order, the justices dismissed Roberson’s request to pause his execution, though Sotomayor emphasized the limitations of current postconviction remedies in addressing wrongful convictions based on discredited science. She acknowledged the innocence evidence presented by Roberson and urged the governor for a 30-day reprieve to prevent potential miscarriages of justice.