Sign up for TPR Today, Texas Public Radio's newsletter that brings our top stories to your inbox each morning.
Attorneys for Texas death row inmate Robert Roberson are urging an Anderson County district judge to reject the State’s request for more time to respond in his ongoing post-conviction case, arguing prosecutors have already had months to answer and have repeatedly addressed the substance of his “changed science” claim.
In a filing submitted Tuesday, Roberson’s counsel opposed the State’s motion seeking a 60-day extension to file its answer. The defense argued the State has not provided justification for why additional time is needed now, after the court previously allowed roughly four months for the State to respond.
“Counsel for the State offers no explanation as to why, after being granted four months to answer, on the eve of its deadline, the State now seeks yet another two more months simply to answer,” Roberson’s filing stated. “As previously noted, the State has already filed multiple responses to the substance of Mr. Roberson’s changed-science claim.”
The latest filings focus on procedure — whether the State should get more time — but they sit within a larger fight over whether Roberson is entitled to relief under Texas law that allows courts to revisit convictions when relevant scientific understanding has changed since trial.
Roberson’s case has long drawn attention because it involves contested medical testimony associated with shaken baby syndrome, also known as abusive head trauma, an injury that critics say earlier diagnostic approaches lacked understanding of the science, often treated as definitive and ignored alternative explanations for the injury.
Roberson’s attorneys contend the State’s extension request is unjustified and delays a case that has already been litigated extensively for years.
They argue that the State has been aware of the changed science arguments for a long time and has already made substantive filings addressing them, and that the state in asking for more time at the deadline — without a detailed reason — is unfair, unnecessary and violates the rights of Roberson to a speedy trial.
Roberson’s attorneys are asking the court to take the case moving toward the next steps, which could include a hearing schedule and fact-finding that would ultimately be sent back up to the higher court overseeing the case.
The State’s motion requests two additional months to file its answer. While the defense says prosecutors did not adequately explain the need for extra time, the State typically argues in extension requests that additional time is required to review a large record, analyze controlling legal issues, coordinate among offices, and prepare an accurate response in a capital case.
Roberson’s latest court fight comes after he twice came within days — and once within hours — of being executed as his attorneys pressed courts to reconsider the medical testimony used to convict him.
In October 2024, Roberson had an execution date set, but the scheduled lethal injection was halted at the last minute amid a flurry of emergency filings and new procedural moves that briefly put his case back in play. Reporting at that time described the stop as coming less than two hours before the execution was to be carried out.
Then in October 2025, with another execution date set for Oct. 16, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals again stepped in, this time a week before the scheduled execution, issuing a stay and sending the case back to the Anderson County trial court for further proceedings.
The state’s high criminal court said the trial judge must take another look at Roberson’s claim under Texas’ “junk science/changed science” framework, focusing on how a recent decision in a similar shaken-baby-syndrome case could affect his request for relief.
