US Supreme Court rules in favor of Texas death row inmate in untested DNA case

article

File: The Supreme Court of the United States building are seen in Washington D.C., United States on December 28, 2022. (Photo by Celal Gunes/Anadolu Agency via Getty Images)

WASHINGTON - The U.S. Supreme Court sided with a Texas death row inmate in a challenge over whether he had standing to sue a district attorney who refused to test DNA evidence.

Gutierrez v. Saenz

Ruben Gutierrez

The backstory:

Ruben Gutierrez, 47, was sentenced to death for the 1998 killing Escolastica Harrison in Brownsville.

Prosecutors said Gutierrez used one of the two screwdrivers used to stab the 85-year-old Harrison to death during a robbery of her mobile home.

He was later convicted of capital murder.

Gutierrez admitted to being a part of the robbery, but says he never entered the mobile home. He argues that testing DNA evidence would prove that he was not the one who murdered Harrison.

DOWNLOAD THE FOX LOCAL APP

Texas courts and Cameron County Luis Saenz have refused to test the DNA.

Saenz's defense team argued that even if the DNA testing did not come up positive for Gutierrez, he would not be cleared of guilt. Gutierrez's conviction was under the Texas law of parties, allowing for people charged if they were party to a crime they knew could cause deadly harm.

Gutierrez's team alleged the local prosecutor's denial of his DNA testing request prevented him from using state procedures to be acquitted or a sentence reduction.

Gutierrez v. Saenz - Supreme Court Ruling

Dig deeper:

Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor delivered the majority opinion in the 6-3 ruling.

Sotomayor argued that a Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals ruling that Gutierrez did not have standing to sue goes against the Supreme Court's 2023 ruling in Reed v. Goertz.

"Gutierrez has standing to challenge Texas’s DNA testing procedures under the Due Process Clause," Sotomayor wrote.

Justice Samuel Alito wrote the dissent in the case, which was joined by Justices Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch.

Alito cites conflicting statements given by Gutierrez and says the majority is misinterpreting Reed v. Goertz.

"This decision’s only practical effect will be to aid and abet Gutierrez’s efforts to run out the clock on the execution of his sentence. And if the decision is taken seriously as a precedent on Article III standing, it will do serious damage," Alito wrote.

What they're saying:

"Today, Ruben Gutierrez is one step closer to proving that he was wrongfully sentenced to death. The Court’s decision makes clear that Ruben has a legal right to challenge the Texas post-conviction DNA statute which limits his access to DNA testing to show he should not have been sentenced to death. We trust the Cameron County District Attorney will heed the Supreme Court’s decision and provide us, at long last, with access to the extensive forensic evidence in Ruben’s case," wrote Shawn Nolan, an attorney for Rubern Gutierrez in a statement.