HOUSTON – Antonio ‘AJ’ Armstrong Jr. is asking that his appeal process be paused, and his case returned to Judge Kelli Johnson’s courtroom for a special hearing that could have affected his trial and may grant him a new one.
Recommended Videos
Initially, a motion for a new trial was denied by operational law. Operational law happens when the trial court doesn’t rule on a motion in a specific time frame.
Now, a motion to abate filed in the Fourteenth Court of Appeals states that a lab technician who handled blood evidence during Armstrong Jr.’s third trial was terminated because of the quality of her work. Armstrong Jr. was convicted of shooting and killing his mother and father, Dawn and Antonio Sr., at the conclusion of his third trial in August 2023.
In April, KPRC 2 Investigates was the first to tell you about the 392 Brady Notices issued from the Harris County District Attorney’s Office involving high-profile cases like Migos rapper Kirsnick Khari Ball (better known as Takeoff) and Armstrong Jr.
That Brady Notice involved former Houston Forensic Science Center Forensic Analyst Rochelle Austen, whose work quality was called into question.
- WATCH: What are Brady violations?
“First off, I am still constantly amazed at Mr. Armstrong just cannot get a fair trial in this county. It keeps becoming more and more obvious,” said Armstrong Jr’s appeals attorney, Patrick McCann.
A court filing alleges the original defense team could have called “Austen to the stand during the trial had they known of the poor performance in her past to support their theory of cross contamination of DNA samples and biological evidence.”
DNA became a focal point once blood specks were found under a Houston Police Department visitor badge sticker placed on Armstrong Jr. before his interrogation, ultimately delaying the trial for a month.
Rick DeToto, Armstrong Jr’s defense attorney, told us, “We argued and effectively showed that the blood specs could have been the result of cross-contamination. The suspension of this analyst involved in AJ’s case goes directly to that argument. If the defense knew this information in a timely manner, we likely would have changed our trial strategy, including calling this analyst in AJ’s defense to further prove the unreliability of the blood evidence.”
The court filing states, “This matter was clearly under investigation prior to the disclosure date.”
“I blame the forensic center and the Harris County District Attorney’s Office for failing to get this released in a more timely way,” McCann adds.
Clint Morgan, an Assistant District Attorney with the Harris County District Attorney’s Office, responded to the claims on Friday stating, “This Court is without authority to extend the timeline for a motion for new trial.”
Morgan argues the trial court still has jurisdiction over Armstrong’s case until the clerk’s record and the reporter’s records are filed.
As of Monday, the reporters record was not turned in.
“The appellant’s request to abate this case for an out-of-time motion for new trial [is] both pointless and beyond this Court’s power,” Morgan states. “The appellant’s underlying issue concerns some newly discovered evidence, but that’s classic material for post-conviction habeas litigation.”
If the motion gets granted, it’s unclear when the hearing would be held in the 178th District Court to determine if the facts involving Austen would have impacted the third trial.
KPRC 2 reached out to the Harris County District Attorney’s Office for a comment and will provide that once available.