UPDATE: The Texas District Court judge that set Charles Hood’s execution date has withdrawn the warrant for execution and recused himself from the case, thereby likely delaying the execution indefinitely. Hood’s attorneys filed a motion for discovery of information about the affair between the judge and prosecutor at Hood’s trial. (Dallas Morning News, June 17, 2008). Hood was granted a 30-day reprieve by the governor.

Charles Hood is scheduled to be executed in Texas on June 17. His attorneys recently filed an appeal arguing that the judge and the prosecutor at Hood’s trial were having an affair at the time of the trial. The appeal includes an affidavit from a former member of the district attorney’s office that prosecuted Hood stating that it was “common knowledge” that the Judge, Verla Sue Holland, and the prosecutor, Tim O’Connell, had a six-year relationship and that this raised doubts about the impartiality of the trial.

Judge Holland also served on the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, the court that will initially review Hood’s claim that she should have recused herself. The Texas Constitution states that judges must avoid “any appearance of impropriety.” Hood has also filed a request with the governor for a reprieve.
(N.Y. Times, June 13, 2008). See Arbitrariness.

UPDATE:
Ten of the country’s leading legal ethicists filed a statement on the eve of the execution with the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals stating such a relationship rendered Hood’s
trial “invalid” because there was a “structural defect” requiring a vacating of his conviction. (Press Release, Texas Defender Service, June 16, 2008).