KTBB News, Weather, Talk

HOUSTON (AP) — A Texas man is facing execution Wednesday for the strangling and stabbing death of a young North Texas mother more than 20 years ago.

Moises Sandoval Mendoza was condemned for the March 2004 killing of 20-year-old Rachelle O’Neil Tolleson. Prosecutors say Mendoza took Tolleson from her home in Farmersville, leaving her 6-month-old daughter alone. The infant was found cold and wet but safe the next day by Tolleson’s mother. Tolleson’s body was found six days later near a creek.

Mendoza, 41, was scheduled to receive a lethal injection Wednesday evening at the state penitentiary in Huntsville.

Evidence in Mendoza’s case showed he also burned Tolleson’s body to hide his fingerprints. Dental records were used to identify her, according to investigators.

Mendoza’s lawyers have asked the U.S. Supreme Court to stop the scheduled execution after lower courts previously rejected his petitions for a stay. The Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles on Monday denied Mendoza’s request to commute his death sentence to a lesser penalty.

In their petition before the Supreme Court, Mendoza’s attorneys said he was prevented by lower courts from arguing that he had been denied effective assistance of counsel earlier in the appeals process.

Mendoza’s lawyers allege that a previous appeals attorney, as well as his trial lawyer, had failed to challenge critical testimony by a detention officer, Robert Hinton. That testimony was used by prosecutors to persuade jurors that Mendoza would be a future danger to society — a legal finding needed to secure a death sentence in Texas.

Mendoza’s lawyers allege the officer, who worked in the county jail where the inmate was being held after his arrest, gave false testimony that Mendoza had started a fight with another inmate. Mendoza’s lawyers say the other inmate now claims in an affidavit that he believed detention officers wanted him to start the fight, and he was later rewarded for it.

“There is no doubt the jury was listening. During its deliberations, the jury specifically asked about Mendoza’s ‘criminal acts while in jail,’ including the ‘assault on other inmate,’” Mendoza’s lawyers said in their petition to the Supreme Court. “As evidenced by the jury’s notes, there is a reasonable probability that trial counsel’s error in failing to investigate Hinton’s testimony affected the result.”

But the Texas Attorney General’s Office told the Supreme Court that Mendoza’s claim of ineffective assistance of counsel has already been found by a lower federal court to be “meritless and insubstantial.”

Even if the detention officer’s testimony were eliminated, the jury heard substantial evidence regarding Mendoza’s future dangerousness and his long history of violence, especially against women, including physically attacking his mother and sister and sexually assaulting a 14-year-old girl, according to the attorney general’s office.

“Finally, given the extreme delay in this two-decade-old case, the public interest weighs heavily against a stay. The State and crime victims have a ’powerful and legitimate interest in punishing the guilty,’” the attorney general’s office said in its petition.

Authorities said that in the days before the killing, Mendoza had attended a party at Tolleson’s home in Farmersville, about 45 miles (72 kilometers) northeast of Dallas. On the day her body was found, Mendoza told a friend about the killing. The friend called police and Mendoza was arrested.

Mendoza confessed to police but couldn’t give detectives a reason for his actions, authorities said. He told investigators he repeatedly choked Tolleson, sexually assaulted her and dragged her body to a field, where he choked her again and then stabbed her in the throat. He later moved her body to a more remote location and burned it.

If the execution is carried out, Mendoza would be the third inmate put to death this year in Texas, historically the nation’s busiest capital punishment state, and the 13th in the U.S.

On Thursday, Alabama planned to execute James Osgood for the 2010 rape and murder of a woman.

___

Follow Juan A. Lozano: https://twitter.com/juanlozano70

McALLEN, Texas (AP) — Hubert Montoya burst out laughing when the U.S. Department of Homeland Security emailed to say he should leave the country immediately or risk consequences of being deported. He is a U.S. citizen.

“I just thought it was absurd,” the Austin, Texas, immigration attorney said.

It was an apparent glitch in the Trump administration’s dismantling of another Biden-era policy that allowed people to live and work in the country temporarily. U.S. Customs and Border Protection is quietly revoking two-year permits of people who used an online appointment app at U.S. border crossings with Mexico called CBP One, which brought in more than 900,000 people starting in January 2023.

The revocation of CBP One permits has lacked the fanfare and formality of canceling Temporary Protected Status for hundreds of thousands whose homelands were previously deemed unsafe for return and humanitarian parole for others from Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua and Venezuela who came with financial sponsors. Those moves came with official notices in the Federal Register and press releases. Judges halted them from taking effect after advocacy groups sued.

CBP One cancellation notices began landing in inboxes in late March without warning, some telling recipients to leave immediately and others giving them seven days. Targets included U.S. citizens.

Timothy J. Brenner, a Connecticut-born lawyer in Houston, was told April 11 to leave the U.S. “I became concerned that the administration has a list of immigration attorneys or a database that they’re trying to target to harass,” he said.

CBP confirmed in a statement that it issued notices terminating temporary legal status under CBP One. It did not say how many, just that they weren’t sent to all beneficiaries, which totaled 936,000 at the end of December.

CBP said notices may have been sent to unintended recipients, including attorneys, if beneficiaries provided contact information for U.S. citizens. It is addressing those situations case-by-case.

Online chat groups reflect fear and confusion, which, according to critics, is the administration’s intended effect. Brenner said three clients who received the notices chose to return to El Salvador after being told to leave.

“The fact that we don’t know how many people got this notice is part of the problem. We’re getting reports from attorneys and folks who don’t know what to make of the notice,” said Hillary Li, counsel for the Justice Action Center, an advocacy group.

President Donald Trump suspended CBP One for new arrivals his first day in office but those already in the U.S. believed they could stay at least until their two-year permits expired. The cancellation notices that some received ended that sense of temporary stability. “It is time for you to leave the United States,” the letters began.

“It’s really confusing,” said Robyn Barnard, senior director for refugee advocacy at Human Rights First. “Imagine how people who entered through that process feel when they’re hearing through their different community chats, rumors or screenshots that some friends have received notice and others didn’t.”

Attorneys say some CBP One beneficiaries may still be within a one-year window to file an asylum claim or seek other relief.

Notices have been sent to others whose removal orders are on hold under other forms of temporary protection. A federal judge in Massachusetts temporarily halted deportations for more than 500,000 Cubans, Haitians, Nicaraguans and Venezuelans who came since late 2022 after applying online with a financial sponsor and flying to a U.S. airport at their own expense.

Maria, a 48-year-old Nicaraguan woman who cheered Trump’s election and arrived via that path, said the notice telling her to leave landed like “a bomb. It paralyzed me.”

Maria, who asked to be named only by her middle name for fear of being detained and deported, said in a telephone interview from Florida that she would continue cleaning houses to support herself and file for asylum.

___

Salomon reported from Miami. Associated Press writers Rebecca Santana in Washington and Elliot Spagat in San Diego contributed.

UVALDE (ABC) — An attorney representing the families of the Robb Elementary School mass shooting victims confirmed to ABC News on Tuesday night that a settlement was reached and approved by a unanimous vote at a city council meeting in Uvalde, Texas.

Josh Koskoff, one of the attorneys who filed the lawsuit against the city, did not specify the exact terms of the settlement.

The lawsuit responds to the circumstances surrounding the school shooting that took place on May 24, 2022, claiming the lives of two teachers and 19 students.

In addition to a monetary settlement that would be paid out by the city’s insurance, the families were asking for Uvalde Police to adopt new fitness standards for the force and boost officer training, attorneys announced at a press conference in May 2024.

At the time of filing the suit, Koskoff told ABC News that the plaintiffs also were asking the city to maintain the cemetery where many of the victims are buried and to provide an updated accounting of the donations and spending related to May 24.

The plaintiffs were also asking to designate May 24 as an official day of remembrance in Uvalde and to create a committee for a permanent memorial in town.

The attorney confirmed all 21 victims’ families were represented in the lawsuit, but didn’t disclose any others who are listed as plaintiffs.

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

AUSTIN (AP) — The executive director of the Texas Lottery Commission has resigned, the latest shake-up at the state’s retail gambling enterprise amid multiple investigations into jackpots in 2023 and earlier this year totaling nearly $200 million, and calls from some lawmakers to shut it down.

The lottery announced Ryan Mindell’s resignation on Monday without comment. A former deputy director and operations director at the lottery, Mindell had held the top job for only about a year following the abrupt resignation of his predecessor.

He leaves as the agency faces at least two investigations ordered by Gov. Greg Abbott and state Attorney General Ken Paxton into the integrity of the lottery prizes, and how the state handled the introduction of courier companies that buy and send tickets on behalf of customers online.

The companies and lottery officials have denied wrongdoing. But Texas state lawmakers are considering forcing several changes, ranging from a legal ban on sales through courier companies to shutting down the agency by taking away all of its funding.

The Texas lottery was established in 1991 and sends a portion of its annual revenue to public education. In 2024, that meant about $2 billion sent to the state’s public school fund.

But two of the biggest jackpots in agency history prompted flares of scrutiny and criticism from media, lawmakers and state officials who question whether they were fairly won and if courier companies should be allowed.

First, a $95 million jackpot in 2023 was awarded when the winners bought nearly every possible number combination — more than 25 million of them. In February, an $83 million ticket was won with a ticket purchased at a courier store. The chain that operates the store has locations in six states.

A Houston Chronicle investigation initially detailed the buying efforts behind the 2023 jackpot, but it was the second one that finally grabbed the attention of prominent state lawmakers, as well as the governor and the state attorney general. An agency that typically garners little attention beyond the millions it awards in jackpots and scratch-off ticket games was suddenly under fire.

Abbott ordered the state’s elite Texas Rangers law enforcement agency to open an investigation, and Paxton announced a probe by the state attorney general’s office. Those remain ongoing.

“The governor expects the Texas Lottery Commission to work within the bounds of the law and to ensure the trust and integrity of the lottery regardless of who leads the agency,” Abbott spokesman Andrew Mahaleris said Tuesday.

A Texas lottery spokesman declined further comment on Mindell’s resignation.

The Legislature, meanwhile, has held public hearings to scold lottery officials for allowing the use of courier companies to bypass state law that requires tickets to be purchased in person. Mindell had told state lawmakers in February that the agency had previously determined it did not have the authority to regulate courier companies, but said the agency would now move to ban them.

The Coalition of Texas Lottery Couriers accused Mindell of pushing the agency to “inaccurately and unfairly” allow the courier companies to “become the scapegoat for its own questionable activities.” The group insisted its members played no role in the 2023 jackpot scheme.

“Mindell’s departure provides an opportunity to reconsider the agency’s politically motivated decisions regarding lottery couriers and restart good faith collaboration between our companies and the TLC,” the coalition said in a statement.

State lawmakers are approaching the final month of their biennial session and have threatened action ranging from writing a courier ban into state law, or even more drastic measures such as shutting down the lottery altogether.

The state Senate has already passed a ban on courier sales, but the measure has yet to get a vote in the House. The House and Senate will soon negotiate a final version of the two-year state budget. The House version currently includes no money for the agency, which would effectively close it down.

But that effort is likely more of a message that lawmakers are serious about making changes than seriously thinking of closing down an agency that generates billions in sales and for public schools annually.

State law allows Texas jackpots to be claimed anonymously, and the April 2023 jackpot was collected two months later in the form of a one-time payment of $57.8 million to a company called Rook TX.

The payment for the February jackpot, however, is on hold pending the state investigations. An attorney for a woman who claims to hold the winning ticket has said it was legally purchased among a group of 10 she bought through the courier, Jacketpocket.

DALLAS – The Dallas Morning News reports that Cardinal Kevin Farrell, the Vatican camerlengo and a former bishop of the Dallas Catholic Diocese, announced the death of Pope Francis early Monday. Farrell made the announcement, about two hours after Francis had died, from Domus Santa Marta, the apartment on Vatican grounds where Francis lived. As camerlengo, Farrell will take charge of the administration of the Holy See until a new pope is elected. Farrell spent nearly 10 years in Dallas, beginning in 2007, serving as the spiritual leader of the area’s Catholics. In 2016, he was elevated to cardinal by Pope Francis and appointed prefect of the Vatican’s Dicastery for Laity, Family and Life. He became the highest-ranking American clergyman in the Vatican when he took on his new role. On Jan. 1, 2024, he was appointed president of the Supreme Court of Vatican City. Here’s what to know about Cardinal Kevin Farrell.

Born in Dublin, Ireland, in September 1947, Farrell is the second of four brothers and a graduate of the Irish Christian Brothers High School, according to the Catholic Diocese of Dallas. His brother, Bishop Brian Farrell, serves at the Vatican. Farrell joined the Legionnaires of Christ in 1966 and later earned degrees in philosophy and theology in Rome. He was ordained a priest in 1978. He served as chaplain at the University of Monterrey in Mexico before joining the Archdiocese of Washington, D.C., in 1984. There, he held various roles and was ordained auxiliary bishop in 2002. In 2007, he became bishop of the Dallas Catholic Diocese and served here for about 10 years. In Dallas, Farrell sought to bridge cultural and economic differences between Anglo and Latino Catholics. He delivered his first homily as bishop partly in English, partly in Spanish. (He is also fluent in Italian.) As he prepared to leave in 2016, he said Dallas had quickly became home to him, he had expected to retire here and that saying goodbye would be difficult. “The people are so friendly in Dallas. Coming from D.C., I really noticed that,” he told The Dallas Morning News as he was preparing to depart in 2016. “And some of the most generous people I have met in the United States live in Dallas. I’m going to miss that.”

SAN MARCOS – A Texas appeals court has ruled that the city of San Marcos cannot enforce its voter-approved ordinance to decriminalize marijuana because it conflicts with current state law.

Last week, the state Fifteenth Court of Appeals overturned a lower court ruling that denied a temporary injunction to prevent the city from enforcing the law, making the marijuana reform invalid. The court determined the city law “abused its discretion” by putting up any barrier to the full enforcement of drug-related laws.

“It is undisputed that possession of marijuana is illegal in Texas … Therefore, we cannot justify allowing state law to continue to be violated,” according to the ruling penned by Judge April Farris.

In 2022, nearly 82% of San Marcos voters chose to decriminalize marijuana under Proposition A. The effort was led by a group of advocacy organizations, including Mano Amiga, Ground Game Texas, San Marcos Democratic Socialists of America, the Hays County Libertarian Party, the Hays County Democratic Party, and the Texas Cannabis Collective, which gathered 10,000 signatures for the petition.

The Proposition A ordinance ended citations and arrests by the San Marcos Police Department for misdemeanor possession of marijuana up to four ounces. However, police can still cite or arrest a person for Class A or Class B misdemeanor possession of marijuana if it’s part of an investigation involving felony-level narcotics or violence.

Also, the ordinance ended citations for possession of drug residue or drug paraphernalia, prohibited the use of city funds or personnel to test the level of THC — the psychoactive ingredient in marijuana — and prohibited city police from using the odor of marijuana or hemp as probable cause to search a vehicle or home.

This ordinance applies to only the San Marcos Police Department and doesn’t affect Texas State University, the Hays County Sheriff’s Office, or other law enforcement agencies in the area.

Paxton sued San Marcos, along with Austin, Killeen, Elgin, and Denton, last year for adopting ordinances or policies instructing law enforcement not to enforce laws concerning marijuana possession and distribution.

Paxton, in the lawsuit, argued these local ordinances or policies violated state law that requires the enforcement of drug-related matters, like possession of marijuana or paraphernalia.

What has happened in the courts so far: Hays County district judge Sherri Tibbe dismissed Paxton’s lawsuit, upholding the argument that the state was not injured when San Marcos reduced arrests for misdemeanor marijuana possession and that it allowed for resources to be used for higher-priority public safety needs.

The Office of the Attorney General appealed this decision. In February, the case was assigned to the Fifteenth Court of Appeals, where the state’s attorneys argued that the San Marcos ordinance obstructed the enforcement of state drug laws. The city argued the policy was voter-driven, but the court disagreed, granting the temporary injunction while litigation continues.

This issue has been hotly contested in courts and city councils across the state for the past two years.

Travis County District Judge Jan Soifer dismissed Paxton’s lawsuit against Austin last year, ruling there was no legal justification to try the case.

Paxton’s lawsuit against Elgin was resolved last summer via consent decree, meaning neither side is claiming guilt or liability but has come to an agreement.

In the North Texas suburb of Denton, where voters approved decriminalization by more than 70%, the implementation of marijuana decriminalization has stalled after City Manager Sara Hensley argued it couldn’t be enforced since it conflicted with state law.

The case against Killeen, which was filed in Bell County a year ago, is still pending.

The future of THC products in Texas is uncertain. Currently, lawmakers are debating Senate Bill 3, which would ban any consumable hemp products that contain even trace amounts of THC, as well as House Bill 28, which would ban synthetic THC and products like gummies and vapes. The House’s proposal focuses more on tightening regulatory loopholes, allowing hemp-infused beverages and assigning the alcohol industry to regulate those products. HB 28 would also limiting the consumption of such products to those 21 years or older and implement advertising regulations.

Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick said he would move to force a special legislative session if lawmakers fail to pass the ban during the current session which ends June 2.

“Kids are getting poisoned today,” Patrick told the Senate earlier this year.

Article originally published by The Texas Tribune. To read the originally published article, click here.