The Supreme Court on Thursday ruled that a Texas death row inmate can challenge the constitutionality of the state’s DNA testing law in his bid to have DNA evidence from his case tested.
In a 6-3 decision, the court ruled in favor of Ruben Gutierrez, who sued Cameron County District Attorney Luis Saenz in a bid to force his office to test DNA evidence the inmate said will prove he did not kill 85-year-old Escolastica Harrison. Prosecutors said Gutierrez attacked Harrison and stabbed her with a screwdriver in 1998, after he and two other men robbed her mobile home in Brownsville to take roughly $600,000 in cash.
Gutierrez was previously blocked from requesting DNA testing in 2011 by the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, after which he filed the suit in 2020. While Gutierrez sought to use the DNA evidence to prove he was not the one who murdered Harrison, the appeals court ruled DNA testing could only occur if to help potentially overturn his conviction.
Shawn Nolan, Gutierrez’s lawyer, said Thursday the ruling by the court “makes clear” they should have access to the testing.
“Today, Ruben Gutierrez is one step closer to proving that he was wrongfully sentenced to death,” Nolan said in a statement. “We trust the Cameron County District Attorney will heed the Supreme Court’s decision and provide us, at long last, with access to the extensive forensic evidence in Ruben’s case.”
The Supreme Court heard arguments for the case in February. Justice Sonya Sotomayor delivered the opinion on Thursday, which largely relied on a previous Supreme Court ruling also out of Texas in 2023. In Reed v. Goertz, state death row inmate Rodney Reed also sought DNA testing he said would prove his innocence.
The district attorney’s office argument echoed the criminal appeal’s court decision in 2011, stating that a negative DNA test would not make Gutierrez ineligible for the death penalty because he was convicted under the law of parties. The law allows defendants to be found guilty by a jury if they assist in a violent crime they knew could cause deadly harm.
The 5th Circuit Court of Appeals later ruled against Gutierrez on that basis, calling the testing “meaningless,” but a subsequent appeal to the Supreme Court stayed Gutierrez’s scheduled execution in July 2024 just minutes before his execution.
In a dissenting opinion, Justice Samuel Alito echoed those concerns and said that because of the unlikelihood that evidence would be tested, the precedent established in Reed’s case should not be applied. Alito was joined by Justices Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch in the dissenting opinion.
“[In] this case, unlike in Reed, it is clear that the only relief that Gutierrez is in a position to seek — reinstatement of the District Court’s declaratory judgment — is most unlikely to cause respondent Saenz to order DNA testing,” Alito wrote in the dissenting opinion.
Cameron County prosecutors have argued that because there may have been multiple killers, any evidence tested that did not match Gutierrez’s DNA would not prove his innocence. Gutierrez and two other suspects — Rene Garcia and Pedro Gracia — were accused of planning to rob Harrison, but each pegged the other two for the murder. Garcia, who pleaded guilty, is serving a life sentence. Gracia was released from jail on a $75,000 bond and vanished. He has been wanted by authorities since.
Gutierrez’s original suit may now move forward to challenge the state’ law in the 5th Circuit. In a statement, Saenz expressed confidence he would still win the case and Gutierrez’s execution will proceed.
“We will continue to litigate on behalf of the victim and look forward to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, once again, denying [Gutierrez’s] relief,” Saenz said in a statement Thursday. “The day on which justice will be served for Mrs. Harrison with Gutierrez’s execution will come.”