Prior to arresting Miguel Angel, police had arrested another person named Miguel Venegas. Police had also recovered from Venegas’ residence knives that were believed to have been used to commit a crime, along with some other evidence which police believed was linked to the crime. After been questioned, Venegas implicated Miguel Angel Martinez and another youth, Manuel Flores, who was identified as “Milo” the son of district judge Manuel Flores. Police then arrested Miguel Angel Martinez for murder, but Manuel “Milo” Flores was not arrested nor as he been to this day.
In August 1991, Miguel Angel was arraigned on 4 counts of capital murder. The lawyers he had from his arrest until that time (7) months, never spoke or visited Miguel Angel to gather facts or research his side of the history. Then, during the arraignment hearing, those lawyers withdrew and another lawyer took Miguel Angel’s case. After speaking only on one or two occasions with Miguel Angel Martinez, this attorney refused to continue working on his case unless Miguel Angel and his family gave him $10,000 DLLs. In advance. This was an impossibility for Miguel Angel and his family, because they did not have the financial income. Miguel Angel’s family worked desperately to get a loan from a bank to pay the legal expenses, but because of their economic position they were denied and so this attorney also withdrew; leaving Miguel Angel with no lawyer to represent him. Miguel Angel’s family in desperation and with no prior experience in the legal system accepted the help of another attorney who accepted the case for very little money. Soon, after this, Miguel Martinez had pre-trial hearings and began to see what kind of lawyer would be representing him. This lawyer had never had a capital case and Miguel Angel and his families were worried because of the poor job that this lawyer was doing on Miguel Angel’s case. Before the trial began, Miguel Angel wrote a letter to this lawyer asking him to please withdraw from the case because Miguel Angel’s family would not pay him any more and because he (the lawyer) had not visited with Miguel Angel or consulted with Miguel Angel about the trial proceedings. The lawyer refused to answer this letter and so Miguel Angel sent a letter to the judge of the court to have this lawyer dismissed because of his inexperience in such a delicate case. (The life of Miguel Angel Martinez was in jeopardy). The judge refused to remove the lawyer and instead appointed him. This lawyer continued throughout the trial and throughout the trial showed his inexperience and lack of interest in defending Miguel Angel.
Despite the lack of evidence the contradicting testimony of policemen and other witnesses, and the testimony of a doctor whom has been known to lie in other cases, Miguel Angel was convicted of capital murder on April 6, 1992. During the hearing to assess the punishment the prosecutor called only one witness to testify against Miguel Angel Martinez, but Miguel Angel called 13 witnesses to testify on his behalf. There were school teachers, church pastors, and even officers from the county jail where Miguel Angel was being held who testified on his behalf so that he shouldn’t get the death sentence. The jury deliberated all Tuesday afternoon, April 17, but could not decide, then on the morning of Wednesday, April 18, a person in the audience of the court saw the prosecutor and the two parents of one of the victims go in the room where the jury was deliberating over the punishment of Miguel Angel Martinez. Thirty (30) minutes after this happened the jury came out with an unexpected sentence, sentence of death for Miguel Angel Martinez.
On June 25, 1992, Miguel Angel had a post-conviction hearing on a motion, which asked for a new trial to be given. This motion was refused. On that day the lawyers who represented Miguel through the trial withdrew, again leaving Miguel Angel with no lawyers to represent him on the direct appeal of his death sentence. However, a lawyer did accept Miguel Angel’s case in the interest that justice be done. His name is Gerald H. Goldstein. Mr. Goldstein is a very respected attorney, not only in Texas but also throughout the country.
On August 13, 1993, Mr. Goldstein and his partner, Ms. Cynthia Hujar Orr, filed Miguel Angel’s appeal brief, pointing out the errors that occurred during Miguel Angel’s trial. If the court rules these errors on, Miguel Angel could be acquifted, given a new trial, or commuted to life sentence.
On March 30, 1994, Miguel Angel’s attorneys, Mr. Goldstein and Ms. Orr argued these points of error before the Court of Criminal Appeals in Austin, Texas. (This is the highest appellate court in the state.) There were approximately 26 errors pointed.
Other events relevant to the case that have occurred are that on December 6, 1993, the other person, (Miguel Venegas) that was arrested, escaped from the detention center he was being held. Even though police had been told of the planned escape of Venegas, police stopped their actions and Venegas escaped. The prosecutor in the case had received many calls from people who were concerned about Manuel “Milo” Flores not being arrested, the prosecutor promised that when Venegas’ case went before to the grand jury, the jury would have the opportunity to indict “Milo” Flores. But with Venegas’ escape neither Flores nor Venegas have been taken to court, and the only person to have been tried has been Miguel Angel Martinez.
On December 14, 1994 the Court of Criminal Appeals (CCA) issued a decision on Miguel Angel’s direct appeal, in which they rejected every error that was raised by his attorneys as having been commit during his trial. The Court’s decision was a 31-page opinion, yet only a six-page portion was made public. (The Court’s answer to only one of 26 errors presented to it for consideration) The CCA refused to reconsider their decision and Miguel Angel’s attorneys filed a petition with the U.S. Supreme Court.
However, on October 30, 1995, the U.S. Supreme Court, refused to consider Miguel Angel’s case. Thereby, officially making his conviction and sentence final.
On November 22, 1995, the trial court in Laredo held a one-day hearing at which time Miguel Angel was scheduled to be executed on May 30, 1996.
A petition was filed in the CCA challenging the conviction and sentence of Miguel Angel on the basis of constitutional violations and new evidence. This petition also asked the court to halt the pending execution in order that the petition could be consider. Miguel Angel's attorneys were seeking for one “tolerably fair trial”. Miguel Angel received a stay of execution and was granted an evidentiary hearing to present evidence and testimony of how he received an unfair trial and should be granted a new one. The court hearing was held over a period of 2 ½ months, though Miguel Angel went to court only 7 days (Jan. 21, Feb. 14, 18, 19, 20, March 31, April 1st, 1997.)
On June 18, 1997, the judge who conducted the hearing after hearing this testimony made recommendation to the CCA, that Miguel Angel Martinez should be denied all relief.
On October 15, 1997, CCA made their final order adopting the judge’s recommendation and denied all relief. Thereby, ending all available remedies in the courts of Texas.
We are left now with a final appeal to the federal court. It is now up to the judge of this court to grant relief and correct the injustice that the Texas State courts have no only created but allowed to continue.
To ask the question why? After these 7 years and the end of Miguel Angel’s appeal, is he still the only one to have been tried for this crime, while those others involved an by all accounts the ones to have committed this crime are still not brought before a court to answer to the charges. Was it from the beginning to set only Miguel Angel apart for execution unto death? Why is the judge’s son being allowed to walk the streets as free man for his part in a crime while they try (with his help) to take Miguel Angel’s life away?
We hope, work and pray that the federal court judge will answer these questions and that he’ll order another trial for Miguel Angel, to have a tolerably fair chance at justice.
For we know that no jury-based on the evidence and testimony would sentence Miguel Angel to die. Nor can those who have lied and corrupted the system, using it for their own personal gain is allowed to go untouched or ignored. Help us to increase the awareness of injustice and to show those who would place themselves above the law that they cannot do so any longer. The world watches and will not be silent.
Get your own Free Home Page