Sharon Keller submitted a motion on July 31, 2009 to the judge acting as special master in her upcoming trial arguing that she has a “property right” to her position as Presiding Judge of the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals and therefore she should not be deprived of that property except by the higher standard of “clear and convincing standard of proof” instead of the standard provided for in the rules of the State Commission on Judicial Conduct, which require only the lower standard of preponderance of the evidence.
“Application of the preponderance of the evidence standard would not be sufficient to ensure that any deprivation of Respondent’s [Keller’s] property interest in her position as Presiding Judge of the Court of Criminal Appeals would not be arbitrary,” Keller alleges in the motion.
Keller claims she has a “legitimate claim to entitlement to her position as Presiding Judge of the CCA”.
Michael Richard had a legitimate claim not to be deprived of life without due process of law. He had a legitimate claim not to be told “we close at 5” by the presiding judge of the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals on the day of his execution.