Latest news with #SecondCourtofAppeals
Yahoo
09-05-2025
- Yahoo
Petition filed with highest Texas court to reinstate Staley's capital murder conviction
WICHITA FALLS (KFDX/KJTL) — Prosecutors have filed a petition with the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, asking the court to reinstate the capital murder conviction of James Staley for the 2018 death of 2-year-old Jason Wilder McDaniel. James Irvin Staley, III, 42, of Wichita Falls was convicted of capital murder and sentenced to life in prison without parole nearly two years ago, on March 13, 2023. He's been serving that sentence in Amarillo's Bill Clemens Unit of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice. EXPLAINER: Why James Staley's capital murder conviction was reversed On March 6, 2025, almost a year after Staley's appeal was submitted, the Second Court of Appeals in Fort Worth reversed his conviction and remanded for a new trial. John Gillespie, Wichita County District Attorney, said he disagreed with the Second Court of Appeals' decision and that he intended to fight it. On May 5, 2025, prosecutors filed a petition with the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, the highest court in Texas, requesting a discretionary review of the appellate court's decision and asking for Staley's conviction to be reinstated. According to Staley's appellate brief, filed by high-profile appellate attorney Keith Hampton, the case for an appeal of his conviction stemmed from a failure by the Wichita Falls Police Department to produce an adequate search warrant or affidavit to obtain such. As a result of that affidavit, several devices were seized from Staley's home almost two weeks after Wilder's death, including Staley's cell phone and a Mac Mini computer. PREVIOUS STORY: James Staley's capital murder conviction reversed on appeal According to Hampton, who argued the appellate case on March 12, 2024, the video never should have been admitted into evidence because it violates the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. According to the Second Court of Appeal's memorandum opinion, the appellate justices agreed with Staley, adding that they couldn't determine beyond a reasonable doubt that the evidence admitted as a result of that warrant wasn't a factor in the deliberation of the Tarrant County jury. According to the prosecution's petition for a discretionary review, case law has been 'overextended' by intermediate courts, and because of this, those courts have 'reached erratic decisions.' Prosecutors argued that Staley's case 'presents another pressing need for clarification' regarding search warrants, and whether or not they should 'account for expanded fair probabilities for household homicides.' 'The court of appeals' disregard of these broadened probabilities, recognized by Massachusetts in a similar case, threatens law enforcement's ability to obtain this critical evidence,' the petition said. 'The frequency of relationship-based homicides makes this an important issue.' READ MORE: James Staley's appeal submitted after oral arguments The prosecution argued in its petition that probable cause 'depends on probabilities, not certainties,' and that a fair probability of finding such evidence on items, like electronic devices seized from Staley's home, amounts to probable cause. According to the petition, this is due in part to the fact that Wilder McDaniel was found dead inside Staley's home, where he had been staying with his mother, Amber McDaniel, and that there was a 'pre-existing fraught relationship between the defendant and victim.' In its petition for a discretionary review, the prosecution also alleged that the appellate court disregarded a precedent set by the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals based on a previous decision in the case of Holder v. State. The petition said that, according to the Holder decision, a trial court finding that evidence admitted during trial, even if the warrant lacked probable cause, would mean that the evidence is still admissible under federal law. 'The intermediate court's failure to follow Holder created conflict among the courts of appeals,' the petition said. ' This failure also led to the improper reversal of Appellant's capital murder conviction.' According to the prosecution's petition, the Second Court of Appeals failed to consider any of the evidence admitted during Staley's trial that was legally obtained. READ MORE: James Staley appeal calls key trial evidence unconstitutional The prosecution claimed that the Second Court of Appeals reversed Staley's conviction due to the videos that were admitted into evidence, including a video of Staley slapping the child with full force, but didn't take into account the remaining evidence, or whether or not the 'Slap Video' was any more or less incriminating than the other evidence. The petition claimed that 'the case described in the opinion' given by the Second Court of Appeals 'was unrecognizable from the multi-week capital murder case actually tried.' The prosecution asserted that 'overwhelming evidence independent of the video showed that only [James Staley] could have killed Wilder,' calling the evidence admitted in the trial outside of the 'Slap Video' was 'not merely cumulative but overwhelming.' The prosecution's petition ended with a plea for the highest criminal court in Texas to reverse the decision of the Second Court of Appeals, to 'conduct its own review, hold any error was harmless, and reinstate the conviction.' According to courthouse officials, it may take anywhere between a month and six months before the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals decides whether or not to grant the petition. If the petition is granted, both Staley's defense and prosecutors will then submit another brief to the highest court in Texas. Prosecutors have also requested that they be able to present oral arguments to the court. WATCH: Wichita County District Attorney John Gillespie talks James Staley trial Previously, Gillespie indicated that even if the petition is not granted, and Staley's conviction is not reinstated, he's not done fighting. 'If we cannot get the conviction reinstated, then we'll try the case again and get him a second time,' Gillespie said. 'I've only begun to fight.' Staley will remain incarcerated at the Clemens Unit while the petition is pending, according to courthouse 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
08-03-2025
- Yahoo
Explainer: Why James Staley's capital murder conviction was reversed
WICHITA FALLS (KFDX/KJTL) — Members of the Wichita Falls community are once again crying out for justice for 2-year-old Jason Wilder McDaniel after the capital murder conviction of the man found guilty of his death was overturned on appeal. James Irvin Staley, III, 42, of Wichita Falls was convicted of capital murder and sentenced to life in prison without parole nearly two years ago, on March 13, 2023. He's been serving that sentence in the Bill Clemens Unit of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice in Amarillo. On March 6, 2025, almost a year after Staley's appeal was submitted, the Second Court of Appeals in Fort Worth reversed his conviction and remanded a new trial. PREVIOUS STORY: James Staley's capital murder conviction reversed on appeal The memorandum opinion and a concurring opinion from the appellate justices of the Second Court of Appeals, made publicly available on March 7, sheds more light on why Staley's conviction was reversed. According to the appellate brief, filed by high-profile appellate attorney Keith Hampton, Staley's case for an appeal of his conviction stemmed from a failure by the Wichita Falls Police Department to produce an adequate search warrant or affidavit to obtain such. As a result of that affidavit, several devices were seized from Staley's home almost two weeks after Wilder's death, including Staley's cell phone and a Mac Mini computer. A later search of the Mac Mini unearthed a disturbing video filmed on a GoPro of Staley slapping the child with full force while he was asleep on Staley's couch, arguably the most shocking evidence admitted during Staley's trial According to Hampton, who argued the appellate case on March 12, 2024, the video never should have been admitted into evidence because it violates the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. READ MORE: James Staley's appeal submitted after oral arguments 'This was negligence at its worst,' Hampton said during his oral arguments on March 12, 2024. 'The incompetence is unusual… This is the worst affidavit that I think any court will ever see.' According to the Second Court of Appeal's memorandum opinion, the appellate justices agreed with Staley. 'We agree that the warrant affidavit lacked probable cause for the seizure and search of his electronic devices and that the trial court should have granted his motion to suppress the evidence discovered on those devices,' the opinion said. The appellate justices continued, saying the affidavit 'does not allege any factual connection… between the offense under investigation and any of Staley's electronic devices.' In their opinion, the justices of the Second Court of Appeals called the GoPro video taken from Staley's Mac Mini 'shocking, its impact undeniable,' adding that it 'would elicit a visceral reaction in anyone.' READ MORE: James Staley appeal calls key trial evidence unconstitutional The justices opined that they could not determine beyond a reasonable doubt that the error of allowing the video to be admitted into evidence didn't contribute to Staley's capital murder conviction. 'It is difficult—impossible, really—for us to imagine that it was not a contributing factor in the jury's deliberation,' the memorandum opinion said. Justice Brian Walker with the Second Court of Appeals also published a concurring opinion, in which he asserted that while he agreed with the majority opinion from the appellate court, he wanted to point out some items he believed were important. In his concurring opinion, Justice Walker first quoted former U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, who once famously said, 'If you're going to be a good and faithful judge, you have to resign yourself to the fact that you're not always going to like the conclusions you reach.' 'The reality is that following the law sometimes leads to results that are seemingly unjust,' Justice Walker said. 'One might rightly argue that is the net result of the conclusion reached in this case.' Justice Walker said in his concurring opinion that the 14th Amendment requires that all searches and seizures be reasonable and that a warrant may not be issued without probable cause, adding that the appellate court has a responsibility to uphold the Constitution. 'Legal precedent is unequivocal in this matter, and we are duty bound to follow it regardless of how unfortunate the result may be,' Justice Walker opined. 'The law is the law, and we are duty bound to follow it.' Justice Walker said that even though the appellate court agreed that the search warrant affidavit was inadequate, the justices don't lack sympathy for Wilder McDaniel or his loved ones. WATCH: Wichita County District Attorney John Gillespie talks James Staley trial 'On the contrary, my heart breaks because of what happened to this innocent young child,' Justice Walker said. 'It was impossible for me to review the record in this case without it invoking serious emotion. I believe that I truly speak for all of us on the court in saying that we are very sorry for the victim and his family.' Justice Walker was clear in his concurring opinion that the reversal of Staley's conviction is not an announcement from the appellate court of Staley's innocence. 'The majority's holding does not mean that Staley is innocent, that the impermissibly seized evidence does not shed light on his possible guilt, or that there will not be enough evidence for the State to prosecute him,' Justice Walker said. 'Any rational legal observer would predict that this case will almost certainly end up in another jury trial.' John Gillespie, Wichita County District Attorney, said he doesn't agree with the Second Court of Appeals' decision. 'I'm extremely disappointed with the Second Court of Appeals' decision to reverse James Staley's conviction, and I disagree with the decision,' Gillespie said. 'The fight isn't over, this is only the beginning. READ MORE: Appeals court should confirm Staley's conviction, prosecution says Gillespie said he intends to file a petition for a discretionary review with the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, the highest criminal court in the state, and request that Staley's conviction be reinstated. 'If we cannot get the conviction reinstated, then we'll try the case again and get him a second time,' Gillespie said. 'I've only begun to fight.' According to the Texas Department of Criminal Justice's online inmate records, Staley is still incarcerated at the Clemens Unit, however, the record now shows 'Special Information For Scheduled Release.' As of the publication of this story, Staley's release date from prison has not yet been 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
06-03-2025
- Yahoo
James Staley's capital murder conviction reversed on appeal
WICHITA FALLS (KFDX/KJTL) — The Second Court of Appeals has reversed the capital murder conviction of James Irvin Staley, III, for the 2018 death of 2-year-old Jason Wilder McDaniel. Staley was convicted and sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole by a Tarrant County jury on March 13, 2023, following a three-week trial in Fort Worth. According to Wichita County officials, the Fort Worth appellate court informed them of the decision to reverse the conviction and remand the case for a new trial on Thursday, March 6, 2025. OTHER COVERAGE: James Staley appeal submitted after oral arguments John Gillespie, Wichita County District Attorney, said he doesn't agree with the Second Court of Appeals' decision. 'I'm extremely disappointed with the Second Court of Appeals' decision to reverse James Staley's conviction, and I disagree with the decision,' Gillespie said. Despite the reversal of Staley's conviction for Wilder's death, Gillespie said he will use every resource at his disposal to ensure justice is served. 'The fight isn't over, this is only the beginning,' Gillespie said. 'We will exhaust every appellate option available, including petitioning the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals to reinstate the conviction. If we cannot get the conviction reinstated, then we'll try the case again and get him a second time. I've only begun to fight.' Staley has been serving his sentence in the Bill Clemens Unit in Amarillo while awaiting the result of his appeal, which was submitted nearly a year ago on March 13, 2024. According to Keith Hampton, Staley's appellate attorney, his case for an appeal of his conviction stems from a failure by the Wichita Falls Police Department to produce an adequate search warrant or affidavit to obtain such. Staley's defense alleged that key evidence taken from a Mac Mini and Staley's cell phone was unconstitutional because the specific devices were not named in the affidavit or warrant, and therefore, it should not have been admitted into evidence during Staley's trial. Gillespie's main counterpoint to Hampton's argument was that specific details actually were contained within the affidavit that led to the warrant to search Staley's devices. 'This was far from boilerplate,' Gillespie said. 'These ample facts implicated a key Texas law, Article 3836, which authorizes prosecutors to provide relationship and state-of-mind evidence in murder trials.'Further details regarding the reasoning for the appellate court's decision are unavailable at this time. The memorandum opinion has not been publicly released by the Second Court of Appeals as of the publication of this story. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
