{"id":12663,"date":"2025-10-20T19:04:11","date_gmt":"2025-10-20T19:04:11","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-tx\/12663\/"},"modified":"2025-10-20T19:04:11","modified_gmt":"2025-10-20T19:04:11","slug":"could-dallas-shaken-baby-case-lead-to-a-new-trial-for-death-row-inmate-robert-roberson","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-tx\/12663\/","title":{"rendered":"Could Dallas shaken baby case lead to a new trial for death row inmate Robert Roberson?"},"content":{"rendered":"

Andrew Wayne Roark waited 24 years to be cleared of injuring a child.<\/p>\n

Over that time, the medical science used to convict him changed. An appeals court threw out his conviction<\/a> last October, and prosecutors dropped the charges, saying he was innocent. Now defense attorneys across Texas and the nation are hopeful that Roark\u2019s legal victory will soon help others like him \u2013 including Robert Roberson<\/a>, an East Texas man who\u2019s sat on death row for over 20 years. <\/p>\n

Roberson has maintained his innocence from the start. Since his 2003 capital murder conviction, he has tried unsuccessfully to convince Anderson County judges that he did not violently shake Nikki Curtis, his 2-year-old daughter, as the state alleges, under a now outdated theory of \u201cshaken baby syndrome.\u201d<\/p>\n

By contrast, Roark convinced the Dallas County district attorney, a state district court judge and the state\u2019s highest criminal appeals court that shaken baby science did not prove he shook his girlfriend\u2019s 1-year-old in 1997 in DeSoto, causing brain injury. <\/p>\n

That was years after a Dallas County jury convicted Roark, 48, of injury to a child in 2000 and sentenced him to 35 years in prison for \u201cvigorously shaking\u201d the girl. <\/p>\n

Crime in The News<\/p>\n

Read the crime and public safety news your neighbors are talking about.<\/p>\n

By signing up, you agree to our\u00a0Terms of Service<\/a>\u00a0and\u00a0Privacy Policy.<\/a><\/p>\n

The state\u2019s Court of Criminal Appeals earlier this month ordered a lower court to examine whether its Roark findings should apply also to Roberson. If so, Roberson would likely be entitled to a new trial. That order came one week before Roberson was scheduled to be executed by lethal injection in Huntsville. <\/p>\n

Keith Findley, professor emeritus of law at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, said the Roark decision \u201cabsolutely should apply\u201d to Roberson. <\/p>\n

\u201cThere\u2019s just no principled way to grant relief in Roark and deny it in Roberson,\u201d said Findley, an expert in shaken baby syndrome cases.<\/p>\n

\"Robert<\/p>\n

Robert Roberson, the Palestine man facing execution for the death of his 2-year-old daughter, speaks to his attorney Gretchen Sween during a hearing to set his execution date at the Anderson County Courthouse in Palestine, Texas on Wednesday, July 16, 2025. <\/p>\n

Juan Figueroa \/ Staff Photographer<\/p>\n

Findley co-founded the Wisconsin Innocence Project and the Center for Integrity in Forensic Sciences and has researched and written extensively about shaken baby cases over two decades. He said the lower court should find the Roark opinion very useful in reviewing Roberson\u2019s case.<\/p>\n

\u201cIf Roark is read and applied faithfully, it can lead to only one conclusion and that is that this conviction [Roberson] cannot stand,\u201d he said. \u201cRoark was a very powerful holding that fairly definitively shut the door on shaken baby syndrome as a proposition of science in Texas courts.\u201d<\/p>\n

Gary Udashen, who was Roark\u2019s attorney for all of his appeals, said the Court of Criminal Appeals could order a new trial for Roberson regardless of the trial court\u2019s recommendation. If so, he thinks the Anderson County district attorney would probably decide to retry Roberson. <\/p>\n

Anderson County authorities have steadfastly continued to defend their prosecution and the conviction of Roberson. <\/p>\n

A reasonable prosecutor, Udashen said, would not seek a new trial given the outdated science and new evidence in the Roberson case. <\/p>\n

Attempts to reach Anderson County District Attorney Allyson Mitchell were unsuccessful. The Texas Attorney General\u2019s Office, which represented the state in recent Roberson matters, also could not be reached. <\/p>\n

Udashen said Roark did not wish to speak with a reporter about his case.<\/p>\n

Matthew Bowman, Nikki\u2019s half-brother, told The Associated Press he and his family are disappointed by the latest ruling staying Roberson\u2019s execution. Bowman told the news service he believes Roberson should be executed for causing Nikki\u2019s injuries by hitting her.<\/p>\n

\u201cIn my opinion, he\u2019s the only one that could have done it that night,\u201d he told The Associated Press \u201cSo we\u2019re hoping that the execution comes back.\u201d <\/p>\n

Related<\/p>\n

\"RobertCase similarities<\/p>\n

The main difference between the Roark and Roberson cases is that the child who was alone with Roark did not die from her injuries.<\/p>\n

Otherwise, the similarities are stark.<\/p>\n

Both were circumstantial cases involving a man who was supervising a child, with no eyewitnesses to the injury in question and no incriminating physical evidence found at the scene. Medical testimony from the state\u2019s experts was key to conviction in both cases.<\/p>\n

In both trials, prosecutors theorized to the jury that the defendant snapped while caring for a fussy, crying child. <\/p>\n

Neither child had skull fractures nor any obvious signs of traumatic injury to their faces, necks or heads, court records say. <\/p>\n

Dr. Janet Squires, a Children\u2019s Medical Center child abuse pediatrician, testified in both Roark\u2019s and Roberson\u2019s trials that the brain injuries had to be caused by intentionally inflicted trauma through shaking. She said only something like a serious car crash or fall from a multi-story building could cause the injuries she found in the girls. <\/p>\n

\"Andrew<\/p>\n

Andrew Wayne Roark<\/p>\n

Roark family<\/p>\n

One significant difference between the two cases is that the Dallas County prosecutors and judge recognized after Roark\u2019s conviction that the science of child head injuries had changed and could no longer be relied upon to prove guilt. <\/p>\n

When the Court of Criminal Appeals sent the Roark case back to Dallas County for a new trial in late 2024, the DA dropped the charges<\/a> and declared him innocent. His exoneration was at the time the 47th in Dallas County since 2001.<\/p>\n

\"Robert<\/p>\n

Robert Roberson speaks during an interview with The Associated Press at the Allan B. Polunsky Unit prison in Livingston, Texas, Wednesday, Oct. 1, 2025. (AP Photo\/Annie Mulligan)<\/p>\n

Annie Mulligan \/ AP<\/p>\n

Roberson\u2019s lawyers say the Anderson County district attorney and judge in his case, by contrast, ignored the new medical evidence and testimony they presented \u201cover 10 court days in 2018 and 2021.\u201d That new evidence, they say, casts significant doubt on Roberson\u2019s guilt. <\/p>\n

Udashen said the landmark 57-page appellate ruling in Roark\u2019s case is \u201cthe most thoroughly written opinion addressing the new [shaken baby] science from any court in the country.\u201d<\/p>\n

And it\u2019s the first time the state\u2019s Court of Criminal Appeals has evaluated the totality of the shaken baby syndrome hypothesis, he said. <\/p>\n

\u201cBased upon this remand, the courts are going to have to address the shaken baby syndrome science as it applies to Roberson,\u201d Udashen said. \u201cNobody\u2019s done it up to this point.\u201d<\/p>\n

Findley said an Anderson County judge\u2019s previous denial of relief in the Roberson case after having access to new defense evidence was not a \u201cvery good sign about the objectiveness or the thoroughness of the review.\u201d<\/p>\n

\u201cThe judge\u2019s ruling was logically and factually flawed in ways that are troubling,\u201d he said, noting that the judge did not address the new evidence in her 2022 ruling.<\/p>\n

\u201cRoark is an example of what happens when courts do it right and look at the objective facts,\u201d Findley said. \u201cRoberson is not.\u201d <\/p>\n

The Anderson County judge, who is now retired, could not be reached at two different phone numbers. <\/p>\n

The Court of Criminal Appeal\u2019s decision to again send the Roberson case back to the lower court is telling, he said. <\/p>\n

\u201cIt seems that the remand is suggesting to the trial court, you need to look at this thoroughly,\u201d Findley said.<\/p>\n

In 2013, when the DA and judge in Dallas agreed with Roark\u2019s defense that there was new science and that the conviction should be vacated, Udashen got his client released from prison on bond while the appeal worked its way through the courts. <\/p>\n

Udashen said that allowed him time to patiently and methodically track new case opinions and new scientific studies on brain injuries in young children. <\/p>\n

\u201cSome of the pressure to get this resolved was a little eased because he wasn\u2019t in prison anymore,\u201d Udashen said. \u201cIt was in this constant state of development.\u201d<\/p>\n

Related<\/p>\n

\"Robert<\/p>\n

The Court of Criminal Appeals took the time, he said, to wait \u201cuntil everything was ready before they wrote their opinion.\u201d The judges concluded in 2024 that if \u201cnewly evolved scientific evidence\u201d were presented at Roark\u2019s trial, he would not have been convicted. <\/p>\n

\u201cIt is one of the leading cases in this area now,\u201d Udashen said. <\/p>\n

Gretchen Sween, Roberson\u2019s attorney since 2016, said she is hopeful a new trial will be ordered for her client, at which point \u201cthe decision whether to re-prosecute Robert would fall to the Anderson County DA.\u201d <\/p>\n

A Smith County judge is now presiding over the Roberson case after the Anderson County judge recused herself last year without offering a reason. <\/p>\n

Medical expertise<\/p>\n

Texas\u2019 \u201cjunk science\u201d law that took effect in September 2013 was instrumental in allowing Roark to make his new science claims. And it could still help Roberson \u2013 despite previous attempts.<\/p>\n

The law allows people to challenge their conviction if they can show that new and relevant scientific evidence contradicts evidence the state relied upon to prove guilt at their trial.<\/p>\n

District Judge Carter Thompson in Dallas wrote in his findings as early as 2014 that Roark met the requirements of that law. <\/p>\n

\u201cThe Court finds that the scientific knowledge concerning shaken baby syndrome has changed considerably since the time of Roark\u2019s trial,\u201d the judge wrote. \u201cThe Court finds that the scientific basis of the state\u2019s case is not valid under current scientific knowledge.\u201d <\/p>\n

Thompson recommended that the Court of Criminal Appeals throw out Roark\u2019s conviction and send the case back for a new trial. The prosecutor agreed with those findings, court records show. <\/p>\n

\"Gretchen<\/p>\n

Gretchen Sween, attorney for death row inmate Robert Roberson, cries after listening to Texas Rep. Brian Harrison deliver his opening remarks during a Texas House Committee on Criminal Jurisprudence meeting at the Texas State Capitol in Austin on Dec. 20, 2024. Roberson, 58, was set to testify before the committee after being issued a subpoena. The Texas attorney general\u2019s office derailed the committee\u2019s efforts.<\/p>\n

Juan Figueroa \/ Staff Photographer<\/p>\n

The Dallas DA\u2019s Office has a Conviction Integrity Unit <\/a>that reviews cases when new doubts about evidence and guilt arise. <\/p>\n

Anderson County, like most small counties in Texas, does not. <\/p>\n

Courts nationwide are increasingly overturning shaken baby syndrome convictions. More than 30 people who served time in prison for such convictions have since been declared innocent, according to the National Registry of Exonerations.<\/p>\n

In 2019, Thompson issued additional findings in Roark\u2019s case that referenced an affidavit from Squires in which the pediatrician recanted a portion of her trial testimony in the case. <\/p>\n

Squires testified at Roark\u2019s trial in 2000 that it wasn\u2019t likely for the child\u2019s previous head injury to re-bleed after impact from a subsequent fall, court records say. In her affidavit, Squires acknowledged that new scientific research showed it could occur, according to court records. <\/p>\n

During his trial, Roark\u2019s defense had attributed the girl\u2019s injuries to accidental falls on separate days. During the first, she hit her head on a coffee table. Weeks later, she hit her head in the bathtub and fell out of her bed while under Roark\u2019s care, the defense said.<\/p>\n

The child\u2019s condition when she was rushed to the hospital was the result not of shaking, the defense said, but of a fall that led to \u201crebleeding\u201d in an area of the head that sustained injury from the previous fall. <\/p>\n

Thompson wrote in his 2019 findings that the jury convicted Roark of serious bodily injury \u201cbased mainly on Dr. Squires\u2019 testimony.\u201d And he said Squires\u2019 affidavit \u201cdirectly contradicts her trial testimony.\u201d<\/p>\n

\u201cThe Court finds that the State\u2019s own expert witness from trial, Dr. Janet Squires, has agreed that there is new medical science that contradicts her testimony from the trial of this case,\u201d Thompson said in his findings. <\/p>\n

Udashen said it wasn\u2019t easy to get Squires to sign that affidavit. She refused for years to speak with him, he said. The Dallas DA\u2019s Office also was \u201cunable to interview Dr. Squires as part of their investigation of the new science in this case for some time,\u201d Thompson wrote in his 2019 findings.<\/p>\n

Squires signed the affidavits, Udashen said, after the DA\u2019s threat of a subpoena. <\/p>\n

Squires left Dallas in 2004 and moved to Pittsburgh, according to court records. She retired a few years ago, Udashen said. Attempts by The Dallas Morning News to reach her by phone and email were unsuccessful. Messages left at two different phone numbers were not returned. <\/p>\n

Sween, the lead attorney for Roberson, argued in an August court filing that Squires\u2019 \u201cextensive testimony\u201d about shaken baby syndrome in Roberson\u2019s trial was \u201cvirtually identical\u201d to her testimony in the Roark trial.<\/p>\n

She said Squires has declined to speak with her about Roberson\u2019s case. <\/p>\n

Exonerated<\/p>\n

Findley said the Court of Criminal Appeals\u2019 latest order in the Roberson case would suggest it is inclined to grant a new trial.<\/p>\n

\u201cBut it\u2019s dangerous,\u201d he said, \u201cto read too much into those things.\u201d <\/p>\n

It\u2019s also difficult to predict whether the state will retry Roberson if his conviction is thrown out, Findley said, adding that he\u2019s seen shaken baby cases that both did and did not end in retrials.<\/p>\n

Courts are generally reluctant to overturn old criminal cases due to the passage of time and the difficulties in retrying them, he said. The evidence always gets worse, he said. Documents are lost and memories fade. <\/p>\n

That, however, does not apply in a case like Roberson\u2019s, he said.<\/p>\n

\u201cThese cases are not premised on eyewitness accounts or people\u2019s memories. They\u2019re premised on scientific findings and expert testimony,\u201d Findley said. \u201cThe passage of time actually makes our access to truth better, not worse, because the science evolves and improves.\u201d<\/p>\n

Roberson does not have a new execution date. <\/p>\n

The next development in his case is likely to come from the Smith County district judge, Austin Reeve Jackson, who must re-examine the case with the 2024 Roark appellate decision in mind. <\/p>\n

Jackson will have to come up with a recommendation for the Court of Criminal Appeals, as to whether or not Roberson should be granted a new trial based on the new evidence and on the Roark appellate decision. <\/p>\n

The Court of Criminal Appeals court can either accept that recommendation or not, and will ultimately rule on what it thinks the appropriate action, if any, should be in the case. <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"Andrew Wayne Roark waited 24 years to be cleared of injuring a child. Over that time, the medical…\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":12664,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[9],"tags":[815,294,102,104,103],"class_list":{"0":"post-12663","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","7":"category-dallas","8":"tag-courts","9":"tag-crime","10":"tag-dallas","11":"tag-dallas-headlines","12":"tag-dallas-news"},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-tx\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/12663","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-tx\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-tx\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-tx\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-tx\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=12663"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-tx\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/12663\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-tx\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/12664"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-tx\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=12663"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-tx\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=12663"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-tx\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=12663"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}