Sign Our Judicial Complaint Against Judge Sharon Keller

If you are as shocked as we were by Judge Sharon Keller saying "We close at 5" and refusing to accept an appeal 20 minutes after 5 PM by lawyers representing a man about to be executed, then sign on to this complaint. We submitted this complaint to the State Commission on Judicial Conduct on November 16, 2007, which was also the day we held a protest at the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals. Anyone can sign the complaint. In order for your name to count on the complaint for the submission, you must provide all the requested contact information, including your phone number and occupation. If you would like to download a copy of the complaint for your records, click here.

We already submitted the first 1600 names to the State Commission on Judicial Conduct, but you can still sign. We will submit another batch of names in December. If you have already signed the complaint, you can click here to send a personal email message to Keller urging her to resign.

You can watch our video of us delivering the signatures. And here is another video of a report that was on an Austin newscast.

If you would like to help us with a donation, please click the button to the left or send a check made out to Texas Moratorium Network to 3616 Far West Blvd, Suite 117, Box 251, Austin, Texas 78731. Donations are not tax-deductible. If you have questions, please call 512-302-6715.

November 16, 2007 To: State Commission on Judicial Conduct PO Box 12265 Austin, TX 78711-2265 From: The Undersigned Members of the Public Re: Judge Sharon Keller Presiding Judge, Texas Court of Criminal Appeals Dear Members of the Commission: We wish to file a formal complaint against Judge Sharon Keller (Presiding Judge, Texas Court of Criminal Appeals) and ask that you take immediate and severe disciplinary action. Keller may have abused her official position to impede Michael Richard's access to her court and thus to justice on the day he was executed by the State of Texas. It is clear from her actions that Judge Keller can no longer be expected to preside over death penalty cases with the requisite fair, bias-free and even-handed disposition so critical to such serious life and death matters. Justice was not done in the Richard case, and if it was not done because Keller dishonestly said "We close at 5", then there is no question that Keller is unfit to be a judge and should be removed from office. SUMMARY STATEMENT This complaint involves a situation in which Judge Keller refused to allow the attorneys for Michael Richard, scheduled to be executed on the same day, to file pleadings on his behalf, based on a grant of certiorari by the U.S. Supreme Court that same day on the question of the constitutionality of lethal injection. The attorneys had requested that the court clerk's office remain open twenty minutes past the 5pm closing time because they had experienced computer failure in the preparation of their pleading. Judge Keller refused the request, even though she was not the judge assigned to the Richard case. As a result, Richard then was executed by lethal injection. Judge Keller has been quoted in the media as having told the clerk of the Court to convey to Richard's lawyers that "We close at 5". However, other judges have said in the media that they were in the building and willing to accept the submission. It appears that Keller may have lied by saying, "We close at 5", when she knew very well that the appeal could be accepted after 5 and that the court does not "close" at 5, because judges on her court are able to be reached and able to issue orders to stay executions even after 5. Judge Keller's actions denied Michael Richard two constitutional rights, access to the courts and due process, which led to his execution. Her actions also brought the integrity of the Texas judiciary and of her court into disrepute and was a source of scandal to the citizens of the state. In addition, her actions may make it more difficult for law enforcement personnel to bring offenders to justice, if people do not believe that they will be accorded due process and fair treatment by the Presiding Judge of the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals. FACTS Without a ruling by the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals on Richard's appeal, the U.S. Supreme Court could not consider his appeal or a request to stay his execution, pending a Supreme Court decision. Court of Criminal Appeals judges were standing by on September 25 to work the evening on which Michael Richard was executed because they expected his lawyers to file an emergency appeal based on the U.S. Supreme Court's decision earlier in the day to consider a Kentucky case challenging the constitutionality of lethal injection. At least three judges were working in the courthouse at the time, including the judge assigned to the Richard case, and others were available by phone, if needed, according to court personnel. Presiding Judge Keller refused to allow the emergency 11th hour appeal to be filed after 5pm. Richard's lawyers had requested the court clerk to stay open for an extra twenty minutes so they could file their petition for stay of execution. They had experienced severe computer problems in preparing the pleading and so informed the clerk. Judge Keller refused the request, and Richard was put to death. Neither Judge Keller nor the court's general counsel, Edward Marty, who had consulted with Judge Keller on the request to stay open, advised any of the judges of the request by Richard's attorneys. Judge Keller did not consult Judge Cheryl Johnson, who was assigned the case. Judge Keller acknowledged she [Johnson] was at the court at the time. Johnson told the Austin American-Statesman she was dismayed by Keller's decision. "And I was angry," she told the paper. "If I'm in charge of the execution, I ought to have known about those things "I mean this is a death." According to undisputed press accounts, Judge Cathy Cochran said, "There were plenty of judges here, and there were plenty of other personnel here. A number of judges stayed very late that evening, waiting for a filing from the defense attorney." She said she herself had gone home, but was available by telephone. Judge Cochran said, at the least, a decision should have been made by the full court on whether to accept the appeal. "I would definitely accept anything at any time from someone who was about to be executed," she said. In an opinion piece the Houston Chronicle published a month before Keller was elected, she called the failure to impose capital punishment on convicted murderers "a human rights violation -- particularly if we take into account the human rights that murderers violate when left alive to kill again." This statement shows an extreme bias towards the use of capital punishment that is inconsistent with the duties of a judge. Keller's action in the Richard case show that she believed her self-declared human right to impose capital punishment was more important than protecting the constitutional rights of a man about to be executed. CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS IMPLICATED Texas Constitution, Article I Section 13: Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel or unusual punishment inflicted. All courts shall be open, and every person for an injury done him, in his lands, goods, person or reputation, shall have remedy by due course of law. U.S. Constitution, Amendment XIV, Section 1: All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. These constitutional rights have specific applicability with regard to Canon 3(B)(8), which follows. APPLICABLE CANONS Judge Keller's actions appear to have violated at least four provisions of the Texas Code of Judicial Conduct and the goals set forth in the Preamble: Preamble Our legal system is based on the principle that an independent, fair and competent judiciary will interpret and apply the laws that govern us. The role of the judiciary is central to American concepts of justice and the rule of law. Intrinsic to all sections of his Code of Judicial Conduct are the precepts that judges, individually and collectively, must respect and honor the judicial office as a public trust and strive to enhance and maintain confidence in our legal system. The judge is an arbiter of facts and law for the resolution of disputes and a highly visible symbol of government under the rule of law. The Code of Judicial Conduct is not intended as an exhaustive guide for the conduct of judges. They should also be governed in their judicial and personal conduct by general ethical standards. The Code is intended, however, to state basic standards which should govern the conduct of all judges and to provide guidance to assist judges in establishing and maintaining high standards of judicial and personal conduct. Canon 1: Upholding the integrity and Independence of the Judiciary An independent and honorable judiciary is indispensable to justice in our society. A judge should participate in establishing, maintaining and enforcing high standards of conduct, and should personally observe those standards so that the integrity and independence of the judiciary is preserved. The provisions of this Code are to be construed and applied to further that objective. Canon 2: Avoiding Impropriety and the Appearance of Impropriety in All of the Judge's Activities A. A judge shall comply with the law and should act at all times in a manner that promotes public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary. Canon 3: Performing the Duties of Judicial Office Impartially and Diligently B. Adjudicative Responsibilities (5) A judge shall perform judicial duties without bias or prejudice. (8) A judge shall accord to every person who has a legal interest in a proceeding, or that person's lawyer, the right to be heard according to law? (9) A judge should dispose of all judicial matters promptly, efficiently and fairly. C. Administrative Responsibilities (1) A judge should diligently and promptly discharge the judge's administrative responsibilities without bias or prejudice and maintain professional competence in judicial administration, and should cooperate with other judges and court officials in the administration of court business. We ask that the Commission determine the underlying facts and, if they are similar to the facts described above, and in news accounts, we ask that you take appropriate disciplinary action. Thank you for your attention to this matter. We look forward to hearing back from you. Attached is a list of witnesses to the event. Sincerely, The Undersigned (list of signers will be attached)

Optional Member Code

First Name*

Last Name*

Email*

Phone*

Street*

Street 2

City*

State/Province* Select a state Alabama Alaska American Samoa Arizona Arkansas California Colorado Connecticut Delaware D.C. Florida Georgia Guam Hawaii Idaho Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maine Maryland Massachusetts Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska Nevada New Hampshire New Jersey New Mexico New York North Carolina North Dakota Northern Mariana Islands Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Puerto Rico Rhode Island South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Texas Utah Vermont Virgin Islands Virginia Washington West Virginia Wisconsin Wyoming Armed Forces (the) Americas Armed Forces Europe Armed Forces Pacific Alberta British Columbia Manitoba Newfoundland New Brunswick Nova Scotia Northwest Territories Nunavut Ontario Prince Edward Island Quebec Saskatchewan Yukon Territory Other

Zip/Postal Code*

Country Select Country United States Afghanistan Albania Algeria American Samoa Andorra Angola Anguilla Antarctica Antigua and Barbuda Argentina Armenia Aruba Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bahamas Bahrain Bangladesh Barbados Belarus Belgium Belize Benin Bermuda Bhutan Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Bouvet Island Brazil British Indian Ocean Territory Brunei Darussalam Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Cape Verde Cayman Islands Central African Republic Chad Chile China Christmas Island Cocos (Keeling) Islands Colombia Comoros Congo Cook Islands Costa Rica Cote D'Ivoire Croatia Cuba Cyprus Czech Republic Denmark Djibouti Dominica Dominican Republic East Timor Ecuador Egypt El Salvador Equatorial Guinea Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Falkland Islands (Malvinas) Faroe Islands Fiji Finland France France, Metropolitan French Guiana French Polynesia French Southern Territories Gabon Gambia Georgia Germany Ghana Gibraltar Greece Greenland Grenada Guadeloupe Guam Guatemala Guinea Guinea-Bissau Guyana Haiti Heard and McDonald Islands Holy See (Vatican City State) Honduras Hong Kong Hungary Iceland India Indonesia Iran, Islamic Republic of Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Kiribati Korea, Dem. People's Republic of Korea, Republic of Kuwait Kyrgyzstan Lao People's Democratic Republic Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libyan Arab Jamahiriya Liechtenstein Lithuania Luxembourg Macao Macedonia, Former Yugoslav Republic Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Maldives Mali Malta Marshall Islands Martinique Mauritania Mauritius Mayotte Mexico Micronesia, Federated States of Moldova, Republic of Monaco Mongolia Montserrat Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nauru Nepal Netherlands Netherlands Antilles New Caledonia New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Niue Norfolk Island Northern Mariana Islands Norway Oman Pakistan Palau Palestinian Territory, Occupied Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Pitcairn Poland Portugal Puerto Rico Qatar Reunion Romania Russian Federation Rwanda Saint Helena Saint Kitts and Nevis Saint Lucia Saint Pierre and Miquelon Saint Vincent and the Grenadines Samoa San Marino Sao Tome and Principe Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Seychelles Sierra Leone Singapore Slovakia Slovenia Solomon Islands Somalia South Africa S. Georgia and S. Sandwich Islands Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Suriname Svalbard and Jan Mayen Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syrian Arab Republic Taiwan Tajikistan Tanzania, United Republic of Thailand Togo Tokelau Tonga Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Turks and Caicos Islands Tuvalu Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United Kingdom United States Outlying Islands Uruguay Uzbekistan Vanuatu Venezuela Vietnam Virgin Islands, British Virgin Islands, U.S. Wallis and Futuna Western Sahara Yemen Yugoslavia Zaire Zambia Zimbabwe

Occupation

You may leave a comment if you like.

0-25 of 2001 signatures

Number	Date	Name	Location	You may leave a comment if you like.
2001	November 11, 2009	Cheryl Hurley	Austin, TX, US
2000	November 05, 2009	denise wofford	splendora, TX, US	this was outrageous.... I asolutley cannot believe one of our southern "loving with great personality" judges allowed this to happen i mean how freaking lazy are you to not thouroughly do your job to it max potential and if you have to stay open 20 freaking minutes late then DO SO....I can understand if it was like 4-8 hours but come on you killed a man that was appealed....how can you sleep at night?????
1999	October 10, 2009	Jess Marchand	Narbonne,
1998	October 10, 2009	susanne mvuyekure	stuttgart, AL, DE	there must be a (personal) reason for this uncomprehensible behavior...
1997	September 28, 2009	Britttney Gutierrez	Mineral Wells, TX, US
1996	September 22, 2009	Christopher Shultz	Austin, TX, US
1995	September 18, 2009	DaSunshine Westbrook	Arlington, TX, US	Isaiah 2:11(NLT)-“Human PRIDE will be brought down, and human ARROGANCE will be humbled. Only the Lord will be exalted on that day of judgment.” ... It's a shame how we allow ourselves to forget that God is still in control of ALL of our lives. Judge Sharon Keller made herself a 'little god'. Having Judge Keller resign is not enough. She should be removed, fired, terminated or whatever cute name they call it in Texas. This woman’s ARROGANCE is just one of many Judges, her RACE, that are just like her. She is no different from Judge Steve M. King/Probate Court One/Ft Worth, TX. Steve M. King also has made himself a ‘little god’. Do you find it strange that both Steve King and Sharon Keller initials are S. K.? ‘SHE KILLS’! Sharon Keller should be removed PERMANENTLY; just like the young man's life that was taken and can never be again. If she resigns, then she can come again. She should never be allowed to return and ALL the wicked judges and lawyers like her should receive the same punishment, especially in TEXAS. It's a WICKED place to be when you are NON-White. I am so sick of Racist, Evil, Wicked, Hateful Races because of the color of ones skin. I pray for the day that it will all be over; and "It's NOT a Dream." IT'S REAL!... 2 Corinthians 12:20(NLT)-"For I am afraid that when I come I won’t like what I find, and you won’t like my response. I am afraid that I will find quarreling, jealousy, anger, selfishness, slander, gossip, arrogance, and disorderly behavior."... Proverbs 21:4(MSG)–“Arrogance and pride—distinguishing marks in the wicked— are just plain sin.”
1994	September 13, 2009	Casey Chapman	Austin, TX, US
1993	August 22, 2009	Grzegorz Szyszkowski	Poznan, PL
1992	August 22, 2009	Ioannis Hasikos	Nicosia, CY
1991	August 19, 2009	Monica Hwang	houston, TX, US
1990	August 18, 2009	June Benjamin	Santa Maria, CA,	Sharon Keller is another good reason for the abolition of the death penalty. She should be ashamed of herself - she is a disgrace to the legal profession and to humanity.
1989	August 18, 2009	Manuel Valencia	Tempe, AZ, US	I'ts hard to believe that in this day and age we are still killing people in the name of the state! We should all be ashamed for the society we helped create and continually support.
1988	August 18, 2009	Samuel Gottlieb	Scottsdale, AZ, US	What happens in Texas should stay in Texas. The "Keller Incident" is not only nauseating but a perfect illustration of the dystopia in which Texas Justice is mired
1987	August 17, 2009	Mary Jane Martinez	San Antonio, TX,	We need ACCOUNTABILITY Now not a slap on the wrist with pay!!!Todays court hearing was unbelievable for high security with k-9 dogs. I would like to know how much money $$$ did the District Attorney/BexarCounty paid out for high security, for a minute I thought that our President was visiting San Antonio! Another life has been taken not just another SID number. Bottom line Judge S.Keller needs to turn in her resignation because "NO ONE IS ABOVE THE LAW" and neither are Jugdes!
1986	August 17, 2009	bob cobb	beverly hills, CA, US	I like 2 poop, and when judges like you refuse my right 2 poop, well that just boils my britches. I like 2 poop.
1985	August 17, 2009	Scott Levison	Pinellas Park, FL, US
1984	August 16, 2009	Stefan Linden	Mariehamn, FI
1983	June 11, 2009	elaine tyler	liversedge, GB
1982	June 01, 2009	Diane Lee	Tomball, TX, US
1981	May 29, 2009	whitneye kidd	taylor, TX, US
1980	May 18, 2009	ute maria benz	ulm, DE
1979	April 25, 2009	Camille TILLING	HOWALD, LU
1978	April 25, 2009	Bridgett Lee	Liberty Hill, TX, US
1977	April 24, 2009	L gray	katy, TX, US

Next ->