Last night, April 23, 2025, the State of Texas executed Moises Sandoval Mendoza after the Supreme Court of the United States denied his application for a stay of execution and a petition for a writ of certiorari.
Mendoza was the third person put to death by the State this year. In 2005, a Collin County jury sentenced him to death for killing Rachelle Tolleson; he was 20 years old at the time of the crime. In his final words, he expressed his remorse to members of Tolleson’s family and told his loved ones he was at peace.
Read coverage from the Texas Tribune.
Background information
Mendoza’s trial took place just months after the Supreme Court of the United States ruled in Roper v. Simmons (March 1, 2005) that it is unconstitutional to execute individuals under the age of 18 at the time of the offense. The opinion cited the diminished culpability of developing adults based on sociological studies and neuroscientific research, which shows that brains do not fully mature until people reach their early-to-mid-twenties.
This is particularly true for the areas of the brain that regulate impulse control and sound judgement. There is essentially no difference in brain maturity or brain functioning as it relates to character formation between 17-year-olds and people under 21 years of age.
The jury was not told that Mendoza’s frontal cortex, the part of the brain that regulates impulse control, decision making, cost-benefit reasoning, and self-regulation, was years from being fully developed. Instead, jurors were presented with false testimony about his so-called “future dangerousness,” a requisite finding for imposing a death sentence in Texas.
During the punishment phase of the trial, a corrections officer testified about a fight between Mendoza and another inmate while he was awaiting trial, placing the blame for the incident squarely on Mendoza. The prosecution relied heavily on this testimony to persuade jurors that Mendoza would continue to be a threat to those around him. Yet in an affidavit provided to counsel for Mendoza years later, the other inmate involved in that incident swore he initiated the fight, and that Mendoza acted only to defend himself.
No court reviewed the merits of Mendoza’s claim that this false testimony prejudiced the verdict of the jury, which specifically asked about the fight during its deliberations.
Last week, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals denied relief without reviewing the merits of the claim he raised, and the Supreme Court of the United States denied an application for a stay of execution and a petition for a writ of certiorari. The petition asserted that Mendoza was denied effective assistance of habeas counsel.
In the 20 years Mendoza spent on death row, he transformed from an impulsive, risk-taking, and self-centered late adolescent to an empathic man of faith who had a positive influence on those around him, including guards, chaplains, and wardens. He obtained certificates in several self-improvement and faith-based programs and maintained meaningful relationships with his family.
Mendoza had sought clemency from the Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles based on his age at the time of the crime and the false testimony used against him, but the Board declined to recommend it.
Mendoza was the third person put to death in Texas this year. Thirteen people have been executed nationwide to date in 2025.