Texas man convicted of killing ex-classmate set to be executed
Death row inmate Moises Mendoza, 41, convicted of murdering a former high school classmate in 2004, is scheduled to be the third man executed by Texas this year.
Mendoza confessed to the killing of 20-year-old Rachelle Tolleson in a small town outside of Dallas before his 2005 trial. According to court documents, Mendoza took Tolleson from her home, where she was alone with her 5-month-old daughter, and sexually assaulted the woman before killing her and leaving her body in a field.
Mendoza later moved Tolleson's body to a more remote location and burned it, where a man found it six days later, according to court records. Mendoza has contested the sexual assault, claiming Tolleson left willingly with him, however, he did admit to killing her.
Mendoza's lawyers have filed several appeals, including one to the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, alleging prosecutors had used false testimony during Mendoza's sentencing to convince jurors he would be violent while incarcerated. Those appeals were struck down April 15. Mendoza's lawyers subsequently filed for a judicial review of the Texas court's decision to the U.S. Supreme Court, as well as a stay of execution.
Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton's office filed a responding brief with the Supreme Court, claiming a previous ruling from a federal district court in Mendoza's case already found his appeals meritless.
A clemency request from Mendoza also was denied by the Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles on Monday.
The Supreme Court previously heard another Texas death row inmate's case in February, as Ruben Guiterrez seeks to be able to sue prosecutors to test DNA on evidence he says will prove his innocence. A ruling is expected in his case in the coming weeks.
If Mendoza's appeals fail, he would be Texas' third execution this year. Inmates Steven Nelson and Richard Tabler were put to death in February.
In March, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals granted a stay of execution for David Wood and a federal appeals court tossed Brittany Holberg's death sentence because prosecutors did not disclose the primary trial witness was a paid informant.
The judge who presided over the case of death row inmate Melissa Lucio also recommended in 2024 that her sentence and conviction be overturned after the district attorney's office who prosecuted her admitted they withheld evidence.
Texas currently only has one other execution scheduled. Matthew Johnson, whose execution is set for May 20, was convicted of killing a Garland convenience store employee by setting them on fire. The Supreme Court declined to hear Johnson's case in 2024.
If no other executions are scheduled and carried out, it will be the seventh year in a row since Texas has executed less than 10 people, a continued slowdown after a record number of executions 20 years ago.
Tickets are on sale now for the 15th annual Texas Tribune Festival, Texas' breakout ideas and politics event happening Nov. 13–15 in downtown Austin. Get tickets before May 1 and save big! TribFest 2025 is presented by JPMorganChase.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Intercept
an hour ago
- The Intercept
Trump Puts Lives at Risk by Revoking Emergency Abortion Guidelines for Hospitals
The Trump administration rescinded Biden-era guidance that explicitly required emergency rooms to provide abortions to pregnant patients if such care would save their lives. Medical experts expect the policy shift to sow chaos in hospitals and endanger pregnant people throughout the U.S. In the aftermath of the Supreme Court's move to overturn Roe v. Wade, the Biden administration issued guidance related to the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act, or EMTALA, a federal law that requires health care providers that take Medicare to provide 'stabilizing' medical treatment to all patients experiencing medical emergencies. In a 2022 letter to health care providers, Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Beccerra wrote that if a doctor believes a pregnant patient at an emergency room 'is experiencing an emergency medical condition as defined by EMTALA, and that abortion is the stabilizing treatment necessary to resolve that condition, the physician must provide that treatment.' The memo also clarified that EMTALA preempts state law in cases where abortion is illegal with exceptions narrower than those in EMTALA. In a press release Tuesday, the Trump administration rescinded the older guidance, stating that the previous rules 'do not reflect the policy of this Administration.' The release noted that Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services 'will work to rectify any perceived legal confusion and instability created by the former administration's actions.' 'In places where doctors and hospitals are being threatened with both criminal and civil penalties for providing abortion care, it will cause a delay.' Abortion providers and experts in reproductive health argue that the vagueness of the new guidance will create uncertainty in emergency rooms, denying pregnant people equal access to care and putting lives at risk in states that have restricted or banned abortion. 'The Trump Administration would rather women die in emergency rooms than receive life-saving abortions,' said Nancy Northup, President and CEO at the Center for Reproductive Rights. 'In pulling back guidance, this administration is feeding the fear and confusion that already exists at hospitals in every state where abortion is banned. Hospitals need more guidance right now, not less.' The Trump administration told The Intercept that the idea that the new guidance puts lives at risk is 'false.' 'CMS will continue to enforce EMTALA, which protects all individuals who present to a hospital emergency department seeking examination or treatment, including for identified emergency medical conditions that place the health of a pregnant woman or her unborn child in serious jeopardy,' Department of Health and Human Services spokesperson Andrew Nixon wrote in a statement to The Intercept. Even before the Trump administration rescinded the Biden-era guidance, dozens of pregnant women reported being turned away for emergency medical care since the fall of Roe. A ProPublica report found that at least five women have died as a result of abortion bans since Roe v. Wade was overturned. Most reproductive health care experts believe the number is far higher than what's been reported. 'We already know that women have died because physicians didn't act because of fear surrounding what they or couldn't do under certain state bans,' said Dana Sussman, senior vice president at Pregnancy Justice, a non-profit reproductive justice organization. 'We know that women have died because they have been scared to get care, because they self managed abortions. We know that more women will die, and we and there are probably women who have died, and we will never know their names.' Sussman said that the new guidance will only make it harder for hospitals to feel comfortable providing lifesaving care to pregnant people. 'I think inevitably it will create many more challenges when it comes to what hospitals are advising their physicians, what physicians feel comfortable doing in different states and and I do think that it's putting more lives,' she said. Last year, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in a case brought by the Biden Administration challenging Idaho's abortion ban on the grounds that it violated EMTALA by prohibiting abortion care in too many circumstances. The court ultimately punted — refusing to add clarity — but allowing emergency abortions to go forward in the state. The Trump Department of Justice declined to continue prosecuting the Idaho case, an early signal that it planned to rescind the Biden guidance. Jamilla Perritt, an OB-GYN and abortion provider in Washington who is also president of the nonprofit Physicians for Reproductive Health, said it's important to clarify that EMTALA still stands, even if the administration has tried to muddy the waters. 'This does not change [providers] legal obligation to provide life saving care for people when they report to emergency rooms,' Perritt said. 'The other thing is that it does not change their moral and ethical obligation to do so.' The confusion caused by this announcement, however, will carry risks, argued Perritt. 'In places where doctors and hospitals are being threatened with both criminal and civil penalties for providing abortion care,' she said. 'It will cause a delay. It will give them pause.' It's striking, Perrit said, to see such policy come from an administration that has been masquerading as supportive of families. 'The federal government gets to decide who lives and who dies during pregnancy complications, during emergency events,' she said. 'The hypocrisy is really glaring, because this is the exact same government that's claiming to support children and families that want people to have more babies, but instead it is dismantling the system that protects the lives of pregnant people and their families.'
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Luigi Mangione's team asks court to remove 'shackles,' bulletproof vest on UnitedHealthcare CEO murder suspect
Attorneys for Luigi Mangione have filed a motion urging a New York judge to allow the suspect in the 2024 assassination of UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson to appear in court without handcuffs or a bulletproof vest, arguing that the visible restraints are unnecessary. The Tuesday motion comes ahead of Mangione's scheduled court appearance on June 26. The request, submitted to Justice Gregory Carro of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, calls for Mangione to be allowed to sit at the defense table with unshackled hands and in standard courtroom attire. His legal team argues that the security measures, particularly the use of shackles and a bulletproof vest, serve no legitimate safety function and instead reinforce a damaging public narrative that depicts Mangione as dangerous. They argue that the visual impact of such restraints, frequently captured by the media, undermines his presumption of innocence. Luigi Mangione Argues Double Jeopardy In Bid To Drop Murder Case, Suppress Evidence Pointing to one photograph of Mangione's shackled ankles while seated in court that garnered more than 36 million views on X, his defense argued that it is impeding the accused killer of his right to a fair trial. Read On The Fox News App The motion also says that Mangione has not caused any trouble since his arrest in December 2024. He didn't resist arrest, cooperated with law enforcement, and hasn't been a problem in jail. He's being held in a regular part of the federal jail in Brooklyn, meets with his lawyers almost daily without shackles, and has been assigned work inside the prison. READ THE MOTION – APP USERS, Click Here Accused Ceo Assassin Luigi Mangione Indicted On Federal Charges The defense said that in federal court, where Mangione faces the possibility of the death penalty, he was only made to wear leg shackles and did not wear a bulletproof vest or handcuffs. They also say that making Mangione wear a bulletproof vest doesn't make sense because everyone is required to go through a metal detector. GET REAL-TIME UPDATES DIRECTLY ON THE True Crime Hub Mangione, a Maryland man, is the suspect in the assassination of Thompson on Dec. 4, 2024 in New York City. Thompson was shot from behind outside a New York City Hilton hotel just hours before a shareholder conference. At the crime scene, police discovered bullet casings with handwritten words: "depose," "deny," and "defend," which drew comparisons to the book "Delay, Deny, Defend: Why Insurance Companies Don't Pay Claims and What You Can Do About It." The now 27-year-old was arrested in Altoona, Pennsylvania, while eating breakfast after a McDonald's customer and employee recognized him from a wanted poster. A federal grand jury indicted Mangione on four counts: murder through the use of a firearm, a firearms offense and two counts of stalking. If he is found guilty, he could be eligible for the death penalty. In addition to the federal indictment, Mangione has been charged in Pennsylvania and New York. In Pennsylvania, where he was arrested, Mangione has been charged with carrying a firearm without a license, forgery, providing false identification to law enforcement, and possession of instruments of crime. These charges remain pending. In New York State, Mangione faces 11 charges, the most serious being first-degree murder as an act of terrorism. Prosecutors allege the murder was committed to intimidate or coerce a group and to influence government policy. Other charges include multiple counts of criminal possession of a weapon related to a ghost gun and silencer, as well as criminal possession of a forged instrument for using a fake New Jersey driver's license to check into a hostel near the crime scene. His next state court appearance is set for June 26, while his federal court hearing is scheduled for Dec. article source: Luigi Mangione's team asks court to remove 'shackles,' bulletproof vest on UnitedHealthcare CEO murder suspect
2 hours ago
MAGA rage against Justice Barrett has been brewing: ANALYSIS
Justice Amy Comey Barrett has not commented on brewing right-wing criticism of her votes from the bench nor would she be expected to: members of the court almost never engage directly, much less in the moment, with political critiques. But the blowback against Barrett is remarkable. Not only over her vote with liberal justices to reject President Donald Trump's effort to rescind a lower court order to pay out some $2 billion in foreign aid back in March, but also: Barrett joining Chief Justice John Roberts to reject then-candidate Trump's request to delay sentencing in his New York hush money case right before his inauguration. Barrett joining the liberals, in part, in dissenting over an order that tossed out the appeal of Venezuelan detainees sent to El Salvador in defiance of U.S. District Judge James Boasberg. And then, there was the look she appeared to give Trump after his joint address to Congress. It went viral and the president's allies claim it speaks volumes about her true views. "That's about as close to stink eye as you can get. I've had a couple of my ex-wives look at me like that," Steve Bannon said on his podcast. While conservative lawyer Mike Davis has been the closest ally of Trump to openly criticize Barrett, she's been attacked by other influential MAGA voices, including Laura Loomer, who accuses Trump of elevating Barrett as a "DEI Hire." 'Justice Barrett is probably the greatest concern right now for the Trump administration,' legal scholar Jonathan Turley told Fox News last month. "I'm worried about her. She's a little squishy," complained conservative commentator Megyn Kelly on her program. "Please Donald Trump make sure you find a Scalia as our next Supreme Court justice if you get to appoint one," podcaster Glenn Beck said recently. Trump has not publicly turned against Barrett, likely in part because he still needs her support on a wave of emergency appeals before the court and because he went all-in for the judge from Notre Dame. "She is one of our nation's most brilliant legal scholars, and she will make an outstanding justice on the highest court in our land," Trump declared in late 2020 as Barrett was sworn in. "Justice Barrett has made clear she will issue rulings based solely upon a faithful reading of the law and the Constitution as written, not legislate from the bench," Trump attested. "I know you will make us all very, very proud," he said then. Trump defended her after the foreign aid ruling, telling reporters, "She's a very good woman. She's very smart, and I don't know about people attacking her, I really don't know." But sources confirmed to ABC News that Trump has discussed his frustrations with his Supreme Court picks, saying he thinks they could do more to back his agenda. And he recently attacked Federalist Society leader Leonard Leo, who advised him on judicial nominations during his first term, calling him a "sleazebag." 'I am so disappointed in The Federalist Society because of the bad advice they gave me on numerous judicial nominations,' Trump wrote. It's worth noting that Barrett is unquestionably a conservative vote on the bench and has voted in Trump's interests numerous times. She votes with Justice Brett Kavanaugh 90% of the time, according to Adam Feldman, author of Empirical SCOTUS, a blog which tracks the data. She has voted with Justice Alito more than she has with any of the liberals. Legal historians say, despite the rumblings, it is not a fair comparison to liken Barrett to the late Justice David Souter, who famously became a reliable liberal vote after Republican President George H.W. Bush put him on the court in hopes of a reliable conservative. Barrett has delivered votes overturning Roe v Wade; expanding gun rights; and rolling back the power of federal agencies as part of the administrative state — all key priorities of Trump and his supporters.
