By Ashleen Herrarte and Mathew Seibert
BROWNSVILLE, TX – The defense team for Melissa Lucio – scheduled to be executed in April – is currently seeking the recusal of Judge Gabriela Garcia and District Attorney Luis Saenz.
A statement released by the attorneys for Melissa Lucio shed light on two separate filed motions to remove the judge.
Lucio is a Mexican-American scheduled for execution on Apr. 27, 2022 for her two-year-old daughter’s death. It is known through eyewitnesses and forensic evidence that her daughter died from a head injury after a fall, she was not murdered, according to Lucio’s lawyers.
Lucio was interrogated just hours after her daughter died and while pregnant with twins where she agreed, in the end, she was coerced to say “I guess I did it,” the legal team maintains.
It’s documented that Lucio has suffered a lifetime of abuse beginning at the age of six as well as domestic violence which made her vulnerable to service, intimidation, and psychological tactics that were used and resulted in a false confession.
The statement explained that although there had been a lack of evidence and eyewitness to make Lucio guilty, “corrupt” Armando Villalobos, the prior district attorney saw Lucio’s confession and still prosecuted for capital murder. He is now serving 13 years in federal prison for bribery and extortion.
Lucio’s current defense team is seeking the recusal of Judge Garcia and DA Saenz since two members of Lucio’s original defense team now work for them.
Assistant District Attorney Peter Gilman and Judge Garcia’s court administrator Irma Gilman, had previously represented Lucio in her 2008 trial. Gilman was a paralegal then.
By allowing both Judge Garcia and DA Saenz to stay on the case there is a chance of evidence obstruction, charge Lucio’s new lawyers.
According to Tivon Schardl, Chief of the Capital Habeas Unit of the Federal Defender for the Western District of Texas, and Melissa Lucio’s attorney by having DA Saenez there it would be a “conflict of interest” for Peter Gilman while having Judge Garcia there “would be a prohibited ex parte communication” for Irma Gilman
Additionally, the statement explained that under the 14th amendment, Texas law automatically disqualifies both Judge Garcia and DA Saenez from the case. Under this amendment, no one is to be tried without a due process of law which would be under violation here by allowing them to stay on the case.
The defense team notes that Irma Gilman has learned confidential information while working with Peter Gilman as his paralegal and Judge Garcia now knows that information. Since she knows such information, Irma Gilman is an important witness to Lucio’s trial.
If Lucio’s motion to recuse the judge is granted, then the judge will void the warrant for Lucio’s execution.
Additionally, Peter Gilman’s dual role as DA and predecessor counsel for Lucio ends up disqualifying the Cameron County District Attorney’s Office.
Defense lawyers note the Texas Court of Criminal appeals states, “If a prosecuting attorney has formerly represented the defendant in the ‘same’ criminal matter as that currently being prosecuted, he is statutorily disqualified.’ This is a hard and fast rule of disqualification since there is a conflict of interest with the attorney switching sides.”
The defense pleadings cite that rules of legal ethics also make it difficult for Peter Gilman to cooperate with Lucio’s counsel. Some of this includes reviewing files of Peter Gilman to determine whether the DA office suppressed evidence of her innocence. This was done with DA Saenz pursuing a policy of non-cooperation with the current counsel.
