Criminal appeals court to rehear election wrongdoing case involving Washington County Republican

Sign up for The Brief, The Texas Tribune’s daily newsletter that keeps readers up to speed on the most essential Texas news.

---

Texas’ highest criminal court on Wednesday agreed to rehear a case involving a former Republican candidate for Washington County court who was accused of violating campaign laws.

The Court of Criminal Appeals had previously ruled that the Texas Ethics Commission had sole jurisdiction to make an initial determination about the alleged wrongdoing, which it had not done. So the court dismissed criminal indictments against Robbie Gail Charette, a 2018 candidate for county court-at-law judge in Washington County.

The special prosecutor from neighboring Austin County, who took over the case when Washington County’s district attorney recused himself, requested a rehearing soon after.

The Washington County District Attorney initially received a complaint about Charette, who was later indicted by a grand jury on four misdemeanors: knowingly misrepresenting the true source of a campaign communication; knowingly representing in a campaign communication that she held a public office she did not hold; failing to timely file a personal financial statement; and failing to maintain a proper record of political expenditures in excess of $100.

Charette, who said the complaint was made by a political opponent or their supporters, argued for the dismissal of the charges because the state constitution and government code say that enforcement of such violations must begin with a complaint to the ethics commission. That complaint should have been followed by an opportunity to respond to the accusations and hearings, if necessary, Charette contested.

In September, the Court of Criminal Appeals agreed. The majority opinion found “the absence of prior administrative proceedings in the TEC results in the district court being deprived of jurisdiction over these offenses.”

The rehearing announced Wednesday could lead to a different outcome.

The make-up of the court changed following last year’s elections — and a successful campaign by Attorney General Ken Paxton to oust members of the court who had ruled in a separate case that his office did not have the authority to unilaterally prosecute voter fraud.

Judges Sharon Keller, Barbara Hervey and Michelle Slaughter — who all joined the 8-1 decision stripping the attorney general’s office of that authority — lost their elections last year. Slaughter wrote the majority opinion in the Charette case and Hervey joined; Keller dissented.

Following the 2020 election, Paxton cast himself as a champion of voter integrity — often publicly and loudly touting the number of charges filed against people accused of election and voter fraud. However, those cases began crumbling after the Court of Criminal Appeals ruled that his office did not have the authority to prosecute them.