Texas junk science law

Texas Wrongful Conviction & Civil Rights Attorneys — Article 11.073 Junk Science Law and the §1983 Recovery After Flores v. State, 27+ Years Federal-Court Trial Experience Pursuing Brady, Monell and Qualified-Immunity Challenges Against Officers and Municipalities, Lupe Peña Former Insurance-Defense Attorney Fights the Indemnification Playbook, Wrongful Imprisonment Compensation Under the Timothy Cole Act ($80,000/Year), Free 24/7 Consultation, No Fee Unless We Win, Hablamos Español, 1-888-ATTY-911

If You Got the Call on June 15, 2026, This Page Is for You If your phone rang on June 15, 2026, and the caller was your brother's habeas attorney, and the words were "the Supreme Court denied cert," you already know what this page is about. You are not reading it to learn what happened. You lived it. You are reading because you need to know what still comes next — and you need to know it from a lawyer who will tell you the truth about the road ahead instead of selling you hope. This page is about Charles Flores. It is about the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, about Article 11.073 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure, about the 88th Texas Legislature's 2023 ban on law-enforcement hypnosis, and about the United States Supreme Court's decision not to hear his case. But more importantly, this page is about you — about the Texas family watching someone they love sit on death row with a conviction built on evidence that the Texas Legislature itself has now declared unreliable. We are Ralph Manginello and Lupe Peña, of Attorney911 — The Manginello Law Firm, PLLC. We are not habeas attorneys.…

Dallas County Wrongful Conviction & Junk-Science Appeal Lawyers — Attorney911 Fights Flawed Convictions Under Texas Article 11.073 After the U.S. Supreme Court Denied Charles Flores’ Hypnosis-Testimony Appeal, 27+ Years of Federal-Court Trial Experience, Memory-Confabulation Experts, the 2023 Texas Ban on Investigative Hypnosis, Tim Cole Act $80,000-Per-Year Compensation, and Clemency Strategy When the Courts Block the Door — Free Consultation, No Fee Unless We Win, Hablamos Español, 1-888-ATTY-911

Charles Flores Is Still on Death Row. The Supreme Court Just Closed One Door. Here Is What the Law Still Gives You. If your loved one is on Texas death row, or if you are sitting in a Texas prison cell convinced the science that convicted you is now discredited, the last week landed like a door slamming shut. The U.S. Supreme Court, without comment, declined to intervene in the case of Charles Flores, a Dallas County man convicted in 1999 of murdering 64-year-old Elizabeth 'Betty' Black. The man who put the witness on the stand had no training in the procedure he used. The witness's memory was 'refreshed' by that procedure. The Texas Legislature has since banned the procedure outright. The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals refused to apply that new law to Mr. Flores. The Supreme Court has now refused to order the TCCA to reconsider. That is the news. It is not the end of the case. And it is not the end of the law. What follows is a plain-English walk through what just happened, what Texas's 'junk science' law actually says, why the highest court in the land declined to act, and the legal moves…

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…