Article 11.073 CCP

Texas Junk Science Law and the 2023 Hypnosis Ban Explained: How Flores v. Texas Affects Article 11.073 CCP, Federal Habeas Under AEDPA, and 42 USC §1983 Wrongful Conviction Cases — Attorney911’s 27+ Years of Trial Experience, Lupe Peña the Former Insurance-Defense Insider, $80,000/Year Under the Timothy Cole Act, $5M–$20M+ in Civil Rights Verdicts, Free Consultation, No Fee Unless We Win on Civil Cases, Hablamos Español, 1-888-ATTY-911

The Phone Call You Just Got — What the SCOTUS Denial in Flores v. Texas Actually Means The call comes early. Maybe before sunrise, maybe after midnight. On the other end is the news every Texas capital-defense lawyer and every family of a Texas death row inmate dreads: the United States Supreme Court has denied certiorari. No comment. No explanation. The petition is closed. If you are Charles Flores, or someone who loves him, that one-paragraph order is the cruelest piece of paper in American law. Twenty-seven years on death row. A hypnotically refreshed eyewitness identification that the Texas Legislature itself has now declared inadmissible. A witness who, before hypnosis, told police both suspects were white men with long hair — then, thirteen months after the crime, identified Mr. Flores in court. Mr. Flores is Hispanic. He had short hair. The hypnosis was conducted by a Farmers Branch police officer who had never performed hypnosis before. And on June 15, 2026, the Supreme Court declined, without explanation, to force the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals to revisit the case. This page is not written to add to the noise. We are the Manginello Law Firm — Attorney911 — a Texas…

Texas Wrongful Conviction & Junk Science Attorneys: Attorney911 on the 2023 Hypnosis Ban and What Flores v. Texas Means for Texas Death Row Inmates, 27+ Years of Federal-Court Trial Experience, the Timothy Cole Act’s $80,000/Year Compensation, 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Actions, Free Consultation, No Fee Unless We Win, Hablamos Español, 1-888-ATTY-911

When Hypnosis Decides a Murder Case, the Law Has Changed The phone rings in a kitchen in Houston, in El Paso, in the Rio Grande Valley, in Lubbock, in Tyler, or in any of the thousands of Texas homes where someone is following a case they cannot look away from. On June 15, 2026, the U.S. Supreme Court denied, without comment, the certiorari petition of Charles Flores — a Texas death row inmate who has been challenging his 1999 capital murder conviction for nearly three decades. The evidence that put him there was an eyewitness identification made under hypnosis, conducted by a police officer with no formal training in the procedure, thirteen months after the crime, after the witness had already told police the suspects were white men with long hair, and after the same witness had failed to identify Flores in a pre-trial photo lineup. The hypnosis changed her memory. The in-court identification came after. And Texas has now, in 2023, passed a law that would have made that evidence inadmissible in any courtroom in the state. If you are reading this page, you may be in a different part of this same story. You may be a family…