Greater Houston Criminal Defense Law

Update on Cedric Benson

matt@scheinerlaw.com (Matthew Skillern) — Mon, 13 Oct 2008 11:44:46 -0600

Oftentimes the media jumps on a story of a celebrity being arrested. You see it on looping coverage and on the constant ticker on the bottom of the screen. Then, when the case shakes out, you here one little blurb about it. I don't want to be guilty of the same thing so I wanted to blog on the Cedric Benson DWI cases.

Cedric Benson was arrested on two separate occasions in 2008. One arrest was May 3, 2008 and the other arrest was June 7, 2008. The Chicago Tribune had a greater interest than most media outlets because Benson played for the Chicago Bears. The Tribune was even able to get a photo of the pre-arrest activities.

Let's look at what all of these arrests cost Benson before it was decided whether these charges had any merit whatsoever. First, he was pepper-sprayed. He had to put up somewhere between $10,000 to $14,000 to bond out according to some sources. The Chicago Bears FIRED him. He had to hire high-powered attorney, Sam Bassett, which I am guessing was very expensive. The judge forced Benson to place an embarrassing ignition interlock on his car. His reputation took a major ding and the chance of this guy ever getting the benefit of the doubt again is zero.

So what happened? Two separate Travis County no-billed both DWI cases. (and the resisting). These officers did not even perform field sobriety tests on the first arrest!! According to the Seattle Times, Benson's second arrest, even the County Attorney David Escamillia said Benson appears very well.

WOW. Much ado about nothing. One question for Escamillia is why send it to the Grand Jury if you had problems with both cases? You have prosecutorial discretion to REJECT those cases without a grand jury.

A prosecutor going to the grand jury on a misdemeanor usually means one thing. The prosecutor is letting the grand jury do the dirty work or in this case the "right thing." I am sure the masses would have screamed favoritism if Escamillia would have done it.

Luckily, Benson is back in the NFL with the Cincinnati Bengals.

Brazoria County Judge James Blackstock

matt@scheinerlaw.com (Matthew Skillern) — Wed, 13 Aug 2008 15:55:48 -0600

The Houston Chronicle reports that Judge James Blackstock has been charged with 14 counts of official oppression. The charges center around soon to be former Judge Blackstock condcuting himself in a lewd manner with 3 female county employees. No details have been released as to the age, marital status, or length of employment of these employees.

Some of the conduct includes touching these women's breast and buttocks. Obviously these were not consensual encounters or the DA's office would not know about them. Shockingly but not surprising, the old county computer system was used to send emails and photos. I bet Wayne Dolcefinio or however you spell that guy's name is scurrying down there with a Public Information Request. We should have those emails before supper. It is shocking that number one the Judge felt comfortable to give such concrete evidence against himself by sending an email but number two, he felt bullet-proof enough to do it on the Tax Payer's Computer. Awesome.

I am impressed that Brazoria County Distrcit Attorney Jerri Yenne did not just sweep this under the rug. At the same time, Jerri Yenne will be closely scrutinized by everyone to determine if Blackstock is treated like all other criminal defendants. His case is listed on the Brazoria County web site like everyone else, but where is his mugshot? Usually, there is a bond amount. Maybe, the judge has not turned himself in yet. I am curious to see if the Judge will be allowed to appear on a summons.

I am not sure the last time Blackstock was on the bench. Was it this morning? I have been in front of Judge Blackstock a time or two. Like many judges, he gave off the "holier than thou, how can you be so stupid Mr. or Mrs. citizen." Now he is Mr. Citizen accused of doing something stupid. This case should remind all ADA's and Judges that we are all human and at times we all do incredibly stupid things.

Should he receive compassion? That is up to a judge/jury!

I had a deferred adjudication, can I get an expunction?

matt@scheinerlaw.com (Matthew Skillern) — Sun, 10 Aug 2008 12:11:55 -0600

I get this call a lot. People sometimes take a deferred adjudication on a charge believing that there will not be any consequences. As discussed earlier in this blog, a person who successfully completes a deferred adjudication probation does avoid a conviction. Yet, there are often collateral consequences that a good criminal lawyer will discuss with a person prior to agreeing to take a deferred adjudication.

Employment limitations are the biggest collateral consequences that people face. I usually receive a frantic call right after someone is turned down for a job because of the past deferred adjudication. The caller usually says, "I had a deferred and my lawyer said that it would not be on my record but I was just denied employment."

Well I am telling everyone now, A DEFERRED ADJUDICATION IS ON YOUR RECORD.

Apartments are also being very stringent regarding criminal histories these days.

Employers and leasing agents do not know the difference between a deferred adjudication and a conviction. Even if they did, those persons are not going to feel any more comfortable that you had a deferred for a theft versus a conviction.

So what can you do if you had a deferred. Well, the first thing is if you are currently on deferred you may be eligible for early termination. If you have completed your deferred probation, then you need to file a petition for non-disclosure. A petition for non-disclosure seals your records. Section 411.081(d) of the Texas Government Code is where the law is written regarding sealing one's records.

How do you do that? The easiest way is to higher a criminal lawyer who knows what they are doing. If done properly, the law allows you to deny the existence of the past deferred if it has been properly sealed. Some deferred adjudications are not eligible to be sealed and some require a waiting period from the date one completes the probation.

Marijuana: Arrest or Ticket?

matt@scheinerlaw.com (Matthew Skillern) — Fri, 01 Aug 2008 22:51:22 -0600

EZINEARTICLES. COM has accurate information regarding marijuana penalites in Texas. Possession of marijuana can be a misdemeanor or a felony, depending on the amount possessed. Less than 2 ounces of marijuana is a class B misdemeanor. Less than 4 ounces of marijuana is a class A misdemeanor. 4 ounces to 5lbs of marijuana is a state jail felony. 5lbs to 50lbs of marijuana is a third degree felony. 50lbs to 2000lbs of marijuana is a second degree felony. Over 2000lbs of marijuana is a first degree felony.

In some Texas counties, people caught with less than 4 ounces of marijuana receive citations. ABC 13 reports that Harris County refuses to issue citations and instead prefers to arrest persons with small amounts of marijuana. The article estimates that each arrest costs the county approximately $2,000. Last year alone, nearly 10,000 people were arrested for marijuana possession in Harris County. Get your calculator and do the math on that one!

To Arrest or Ticket. The question really is where does the county wish to allocate its financial resources and jail bed space. It is well-documented that Harris County inmates are being shipped to Louisiana because of overcrowding.

Most persons arrested for such a small amount of marijuana have bonds as low as $500, which would only cost about $75 to bond out. As a local criminal lawyer, my experience is that the final disposition of a marijuana case is typically probation consisting of community service and random urinalysis.

Therefore, although statutorily possible, incarceration is never really an issue for misdemeanor drug cases. Similiar to traffic tickets, there is no reason to arrest people who are not facing jail time. Police officers only "arrest on traffic" as a pretext to conduct an otherwise illegal search, but that is a whole different issue.

What would be different if the night in jail was replaced with a written citation? Would less people appear for their court dates? Maybe, but then you would just put a warrant out for their arrest and add an additional charge for failure to appear.

Travis County is already writing citations and Dallas County will begin the practice soon. These counties are not saying that marijuana is not a problem. They are just choosing to approach the issue with a different approach.

Taxpayers and friends of logic and reason, what do you all think?

Harris County Criminal Justice System

matt@scheinerlaw.com (Matthew Skillern) — Sat, 26 Jul 2008 15:39:19 -0600

Anyone charged with a criminal offense in Harris County, Texas is likely to be overwhelmed with the number of courts in the Harris County Criminal Justice Center.

The Harris County Criminal Justice Center is located at 1201 Franklin Street in downtown Houston.

There are fifteen county criminal courts at law. The courts are found on floors 8, 9, 10, and 11. The county criminal courts hear all class B misdemeanors and class A misdemeanors. Class B misdemeanors are offenses that are punishable by up to 180 days in jail and/or a fine not to exceed $2,000. The range of punishment for a Class A misdemeanor is up to 1 year in the Harris County Jail.

The District Courts are located on floors 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, and 19. The District Courts hear all felony cases from first degree murder down to state jail felony drug cases.

Shaken Baby Syndrome

matt@scheinerlaw.com (Matthew Skillern) — Wed, 09 Jul 2008 19:10:40 -0600

The Houston Chronicle reported that a Harris County man was arrested and charged with capital murder in the death of his son. From what I gathered from the article, the autopsy revealed no external injuries and the cause of death was severe trauma to the brain which the Detectives believe is consistent with Shaken Baby Syndrome.

As a Harris County criminal defense lawyer, I do not feel it is appropriate to discuss this case given the early stages of the case, the seriousness of the charge, and the small amount of information contained in the Houston Chronicle article. The man is presumed innocent and we will leave it at that for now. Yet, I am curious to know what the general public thinks about Shaken Baby Syndrome.

Do people belives this phenomenon exists? Does our medical community and modern science know enough about the brain to make such a determinaton?

The National Center on Shaken Baby Syndrome is the first place I looked. The site at http://don'tshake.com/ is the first web site I viewed. This is a very well-intended site meant to prevent child abuse. It is clear the organization is well organized and active. Similiar to Mothers Against Drunk Driving, one cannot be at odds with the purpose and reason for existence of the organization. The National Center on Shaken Baby Syndrome's mission is to protect babies from abuse.

Yet, I found it unsettling that the site has a page titled "The Legal System's Role in Facilitating Irresponsible Expert Testimony." The purpose of this page was to accuse criminal lawyers of paying an expert to say the syndrome does not exist. Outright, out in the open propaganda.

I have used experts in many cases. You pay for the expert's time and the expert gives you the opinion. You do not pay for the "opinion."

So does anyone think Shaken Baby Syndrome does not exist? In a very intersting article, Shaken Baby Syndrome was put to the test. Michael Prange, Ph.D., Brittany Coats, B.S., Ann-Christine Duhaime M.D. and Susan Margulies, Ph.D., medical researchers at the Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, tested the shaken baby hypothesis. They published their results last year in the Journal of Neurosurgery.

Models were used to simulate forces thought to cause shaken baby syndrome. The research showed that a grown man is not strong enough to shake a baby hard enough to tear brain tissue and cause bleeding. Wonder what inmates convicted of this charge think about that research?

Typically, shaken baby syndrome excludes injuries to the neck. The experiment showed that shaking the model baby would definitely cause injuries to the neck.

So I believe that is a major issue in a Shaken Baby Case. Was the baby's neck injured? Medical research and common sense should require some injury to the baby's neck to be consistent with violent shaking of a baby.

A shaken baby case is a hard case to prosecute because there is credible medical research that disputes the existence of such a phenomenon. On the other hand, these cases are even harder to defend because there is a deceased infant and loved ones and police want to hold someone responsible. Too many times there is a perfect scapegoat such as the babysitter or ill-tempered boyfriend.

Curious to know people's thoughts...

Joe Horn No-Billed By Grand Jury

matt@scheinerlaw.com (Matthew Skillern) — Mon, 30 Jun 2008 18:00:14 -0600

In a very controversial case, Joe Horn was no-billed by a grand jury in Harris County, Texas. The Houston Chronicle reported the Grand Jury reviewed this case for two weeks.

So the big question is was this the right result? Was this the fair result? The answers to those questions depend on who you ask. If you ask homeowners all over the County, Joe Horn did an honorable thing. If you ask loved ones of the deceased, Joe Horn is a murderer.

What do I think? Well if you ask, based on the facts as presented in the media, Joe Horn did not have a legal right to shoot those men. The evidence presented through the news was that Joe Horn was in his home and not in danger, but chose to go outside and confront these men. If you look at it morally, it gets a little cloudier.

The whole case depends on what Joe Horn's mental state was. In Texas, a person commits murder if one intentionally and knowingly causing the death of a person. There is no doubt Joe Horn intentionally shot the deceased. Therefore, the only issue is whether the killing was justified by self-defense or some other legal reason.

The worse fact for Joe Horn was that he disregarded the 911 operator's order to stay in his home. Furthermore, Joe Horn told the 911 operator that he was going to shoot them. Only Joe Horn knows what happened once he went outside.

A grand jury is comprised of twelve persons. It is a secret proceeding. In order for a citizen to be indicted, 9 out of 12 of the grand jurors must find probably cause that the citizen committed a felony.

So why did the Grand Jury no-bill the case? Did the Grand Jury do a complex analysis of legal issues and apply them to a set of facts? More likely, did the Grand Jury decide that the guys Joe Horn shot needed killing? The long and short of it was well-documented. The two deceased were here in the country illegally, they were burglarizing innocent citizen's homes, and who knows what else they would do next.

What message does this send to the community? All people who choose to burglarize a home must know that they may be shot by a homeowner, but does this decision create a sense of vigilante justice?

Mexico Adopts U.S. style

matt@scheinerlaw.com (Matthew Skillern) — Sun, 22 Jun 2008 12:47:11 -0600

We all must applaud Mexico for its progress in attempting to legitimize the rule of law. The Houston Chronicle reports that Mexico has enacted a constitutional amendment that will completely change the legal system in Mexico. The article states that no longer will a judge decide a person's guilt behind closed doors only relying on written evidence. Along with the jury trial system, the right of the Presumption of Innocence is included in the amendment.

The fact that Mexico has chosen to enact this amendment is a compliment to the United States' criminal justice system. Mexico had several options: 1.) Keep the system they already had; 2.) input the principles of the United States system; or 3.) follow any other system out there.

As a criminal lawyer in Houston, I am excited and optimistic of how these changes will legitimize the courts and government in Mexico.

Why Was R. Kelly Acquitted

matt@scheinerlaw.com (Matthew Skillern) — Sat, 14 Jun 2008 10:42:47 -0600

R. Kelly was acquitted in a child pornagrahy case in Cook County, Illinois. The case had been pending for six years. This is a classic example of how the American Justice System should work.

The general public opinion was the R. Kelly committed this crime. According to one juror, the case simply lacked evidence. In a Los Angeles Times Article, one juror claimed that there was not enough evidence to say whether R. Kelly or the young lady was on the video. The underage woman refused to testify in the trial. I find this very strange. The State of Illinois has subpoena power! Why in the world would they go to trial without the "victim" also known as the complaining witness.

The complainant in the case could only have 1 or 2 positions on the situation. One- She would say it was her on the tape. Two- she would say it was not her on the tape. Either way, one would think one side or the other should have wanted her there.

The reason why this case is an example of how a criminal trial should work is because the State has the burden of proof. The State did not bring enough evidence to convince the jurors beyond a reasonable doubt, Therefore, the jurors followed the law and gave a two-word verdict.

So what did R. Kelly win? There is not doubt he won his freedom although the prosecutors are postering regarding whether they would bring additional charges if new evidence presented itself.

So what did R. Kelly lose? R. Kelly will forver have a Scarlet Letter "P" for pedophile attached to hiim whether it is warranted or not. Fathers of teenage girls will probably not be lining up their daughters for alone time with Mr. Kelly.

The stress, anxiety, and outright fear of the government trying to put you in jail will forever leave an impression on him. I am glad to see a jury tell the government that it did not meet the high burden of proof, if they did not. Some observers might say that R. Kelly's fame aided him in being acquitted. I am not so sure about that. A cursory look at the State's case shows the case had vulnerabilities.

As a society, we must defer to the jury's decision. Those 12 heard all of the evidence and entered into meaningful, long deliberations. If they say the were not convinced, then he is not guilty!

Please keep in mind, not guilty does not mean innocent!

Cedric Benson Released by Bears for two arrests

matt@scheinerlaw.com (Matthew Skillern) — Tue, 10 Jun 2008 10:33:43 -0600

Cedric Benson was released by the Chicago Bears yesterday. A little over a month ago, Benson was arrested for Boating While Intoxicated. For all practical and legal purposes in Texas, Boating While Intoxicated is treated as the same as Driving While Intoxicated. Last Saturday, Benson was arrested for a separate Driving While Intoxicated charge. Benson is not the first person to be arrested for a DWI while a pending DWI/BWI case is pending.

So did the Bears act too quickly? Should the Chicago Bears have let the justice system run its course, prior to making any harsh and long lasting decisions. Please keep in mind, drinking and driving is not against the law as long as you are not intoxicated. As a public figure and role model to children, maybe a player should not put himself in this type of situation to even allow the possibility of being arrested. For the cost of a good DWI lawyer, Benson could have taken a cab from Austin to Chicago.

What about employers of common people? When someone is charged with a criminal act, should employers wait for the justice system to run its course before firing the employee? What is the point of innocent until proven guilty if you suffer consequences before the evidence is even available. The old saying is you might beat the wrap but you won't beat the ride. Meaning you might win your case, but either way it is going to hurt.

Truth is employers can do whatever they want regarding this type of situation. There is no legal recourse for being "let go" by an employer, even if for an unjust or unfair reason.

Last I heard, the Houston Texans needed a running back!

Prostitution - Jury Finds Woman 'Not Guilty'

grant@scheinerlaw.com (Grant Scheiner) — Mon, 09 Jun 2008 20:09:35 -0600

Our criminal defense law firm won an acquittal today in a Prostitution case. The jury was out 25 minutes before returning with a verdict of not guilty. Our client was a former employee of the Green Haven Spa in Houston. She was accused of offering sex to an undercover police officer in exchange for a fee.

In Texas, Prostitution is usually a Class "B" misdemeanor, punishable by a fine of up to $2,000.00, up to six (6) months in the county jail, or both a fine and jail time. Promotion of Prostitution is a Class "A" misdemeanor and Aggravated Promotion of Prostitution is a third degree. Compelling Prostitution - which is essentially compelling a person by force or threat of force to commit prostitution, or causing by any means a person younger than 17 to commit prostitution - is a second degree felony, punishable by two to 20 years in prison, plus a fine of up to $10,000.00.

In my experience these cases are very defensible. This is true whether the accused is a woman who allegedly works in an escort service, a massage parlor or as a "street walker." Prostitution cases are also very defensible if the accused is a man who allegedly propositions an undercover female officer for sex in exchange for a fee. Many of these cases involve undercover audio tapes or surveillance video tapes. The tapes are usually of poor quality and can be challenged in court. When the police intentionally choose not to make an audio tape or video tape of the alleged transactions, jurors are often skeptical about whether the prosecution can prove its case.

Given that many prospective jurors express their opinion that prostitution should be made legal, some argue that the time has come for Texas and other states to begin considering the legalization of prostitution. So far, Nevada and Rhode Island are the only two states that have some type of legalized prostitution.

Deferred Adjudication

matt@scheinerlaw.com (Matthew Skillern) — Sun, 08 Jun 2008 17:25:57 -0600

Deferred Adjudication is a special type of probation. If you are charged with a crime in Houston, Texas, then you need an experienced criminal defense lawyer to maneuver your case through the system. If the District Attorney's Office has sufficient evidence against you to obtain a conviction in a jury trial, then deferred adjudication community supervision must be discussed.

The word "adjudication" literally means the act of pronouncing judgment based on the evidence presented . When a judge grants deferred adjudication probation, that is exactly what he does. The judge defers pronouncing judgment. Upon a plea of guilty and other evidence, the judge finds that sufficient evidence exists to find a person guilty, but the judge defers that finding. The judge places the person on probation for a period of time with certain restrictions and conditions. If the person successfully completes the period of time on a deferred adjudication probation, then the case is dismissed. The case is still on a person's record until one files a petition for non-disclosure.

Deferred Adjudication probations can be very risky. If a person fails to live up to the conditions of one's probation, then the judge can sentence that person any where in the range of punishment for the offense which one is on probation. More times than not, a person who fails to complete his deferred adjudication successfully serves a harsher sentence than if he had initially taken a plea for jail time.

Oftentimes, the prosecutor on the case does not offer deferred adjudication for various reasons. If the prosecutor agrees to waive the State's right to a jury trial, then a criminal defendant has the option of pleading guilty to the judge and present evidence of why a deferred adjudication probation is fair and just. If a person is considering "pleading open to the judge" in Harris County, then it is advisable to hire a criminal defense attorney that regularly practices in Harris County.

DWI or DUI - What's the difference?

matt@scheinerlaw.com (Matthew Skillern) — Sun, 01 Jun 2008 21:38:40 -0600

The terms DWI (Driving While Intoxicated) and DUI (Driving Under the Influence) are usually used interchangeably in every day conversation. In Texas, the legal meaning of the terms DWI and DUI are very different. A criminal defense attorney in Houston is the best person to call if you have questions about the legal meanings of DWI or DUI.

DUI is often used to describe any person who has been arrested for drinking and driving. But in Texas, DUI is when a person under the age of 21 drives a car with any detectable alcohol on his breath. A person may be completely sober and show zero signs of intoxication and still be arrested for DUI. A DUI is a Class C misdemeanor and is punishable by a fine of up to $500, but there are possible driver's license suspension problems.

DWI is more serious than DUI in Houston Texas. A citizen of any age can be arrested for Driving While Intoxicated. The first conviction for DWI is punishable by a fine of up to $2,000 and up to 180 days in jail. On top of that range of punishment, a person arrested for DWI is also facing driver's license suspensions, surcharges, and an increase in insurance premiums. Unlike DUI, a DWI requires proof that a person has lost "the normal use of his mental or physical faculties."

What happens if I Refuse to Take a Breath Test?

matt@scheinerlaw.com (Matthew Skillern) — Sun, 01 Jun 2008 21:21:03 -0600

If you are arrested for Driving While Intoxicated (DWI) in Houston, Texas, a police officer will usually request a specimen of your breath. Some people arrested for DWI voluntarily submit to a breath test. This is a huge risk because there is no guarantee the intoxilyzer is working properly or that the intoxilyzer has been properly maintainenced. If the breath test result is above .08, then a driver's license suspension of 90 days or more may be imposed by the Department of Public Safety.

If you refuse a breath test, you may face a driver's license suspension. In Texas, every licensed driver has impliedly consented to take a breath test if properly requested. Implied consent is fancy legal jargon for, "nobody told us we agreed to take a breath test." A person who refuses a breath test may get a license suspension of up to 180 days. Of course you are entitled to a hearing on a driver's license suspension. The hearing is called an Administrative Licence Revocation or "ALR" hearing. If you are arrested for DWI in Harris County, then the ALR hearing will be conducted in Houston. If you are arrested in one of the less populated counties in Greater Houston, the location of your ALR hearing will vary. However, if you retain an attorney to represent you at your ALR hearing, you will not have to attend the hearing. The lawyer can generally handle it for you.

DWI Arrest - Why it Matters Why They Stopped You

grant@scheinerlaw.com (Grant Scheiner) — Sun, 01 Jun 2008 20:52:26 -0600

In Harris County, Texas and surrounding areas, a Driving while Intoxicated (DWI) case usually begins when a police officer stops a motorist on a roadway. The reason for the stop is usually a traffic infraction, such as speeding, running a red light or failing to maintain a single marked lane of traffic.

Although it may be little comfort to the motorist who is eventually arrested and taken to jail, a DWI case may be dismissed if the prosecutor assigned to the case is unable to prove "reasonable suspicion" for the stop. Under Texas law, a police officer making an investigative stop of a vehicle must have a reasonable suspicion that some activity out of the ordinary is occurring or has occurred, some suggestion to connect the detained person with the unusual activity, and some indication the activity is related to a "crime." (In this instance, the crime would be the traffic infraction. If there was no traffic infraction and/or the prosecutor cannot prove there was a traffic infraction, the rest of the case -- including the DWI which was only discovered as a result of the police officer's "illegal stop" of the vehicle -- is dismissed under a legal doctrine that lawyers and judges sometimes refer to as "fruit of a poisonous tree.")

As with just about everything in Texas DWI law, there are exceptions to the rule requiring the police to have reasonable suspicion before they can stop a vehicle. But the exceptions are rare and the simplest way to get your DWI case dismissed is to challenge the prosecutor to prove reasonable suspicion for the stop. Even the most experienced and best criminal defense attorneys in Houston and elsewhere sometimes overlook this obvious defense to a DWI case.

Sexual Assault & Child Sex Abuse Cases: Proposed Changes in Texas Rules of Evidence

grant@scheinerlaw.com (Grant Scheiner) — Sat, 24 May 2008 11:16:52 -0600

On May 23, 2008, the Texas Senate Jurisprudence Committee (chaired by Senator Jeff Wentworth) met in Houston to explore changes to the Texas Rules of Evidence in Sexual Assault and Child Sex Abuse (i.e., indecency and aggravated sexual assault) cases. The Committee discussed whether to make prior extraneous sex offenses admissible during the guilt-innocence stage of trial. This is essentially the approach used in the federal court system under the auspices of Federal Rules of Evidence 413 & 414. The Committee also discussed possible expansion of the Texas Rules of Evidence regarding how cases are consolidated and punishments are "stacked" -- sometimes called "consecutive sentencing" -- in a single trial involving a crime committed against a child.

I testified before the Committee, along with a prominent attorney from Austin. We were the only criminal defense lawyers who testified before the Committee. Most of the witnesses were prosecutors, child advocates and representatives of victim's rights groups.

As my colleague from Austin and I can attest, defending sexual assault cases and child sexual abuse cases (in Harris County or elsewhere in Texas) requires experience, a superior knowledge of Rules of Evidence and courtroom procedure, a familiarity with the science and psychology behind the prosecution of these cases, plus a tremendous commitment to protecting the client's rights in court. Any expansion of the Rules of Evidence and procedure favoring prosecution of these cases will increase the challenges in defending the people accused.

Could an expansion of the Texas Rules of Evidence lead to more wrongful convictions? The Texas legislature will formally consider this and other criminal justice issues in early 2009.