More than 27 years after being sentenced to death for the brutal 1996 murder of 80-year-old A.B. Towery Sr., Brittany Marlowe Holberg's conviction has been reversed and vacated by the United States Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals.
The court’s ruling, announced recently, found that Holberg’s right to due process was violated when prosecutors failed to disclose that a key witness against her was a paid informant. This new development means Holberg's conviction and death sentence have been set aside, with the case now sent back to the district court for further proceedings.
The Crime and Conviction
Holberg, who was 25 years old at the time, met Towery as he was leaving a grocery store. She later entered his Amarillo apartment, where, according to court documents, a violent altercation took place.
Investigators said Holberg attacked Towery, beating him with a hammer and stabbing him 58 times using various kitchen utensils, including a paring knife, butcher knife, grapefruit knife, and two forks. A foot-long lamp pole was also found shoved more than five inches down his throat.
Holberg was arrested in 1997 in Tennessee after being featured on America’s Most Wanted. The following year, she was convicted of capital murder and sentenced to death, just two months after Karla Faye Tucker became the first woman executed in Texas since the Civil War.
During her trial, Holberg testified that she had been in Towery’s apartment following a minor traffic accident and several days of drug use. She claimed she acted in self-defense after Towery hit her first but then “lost it” during the altercation. The prosecution, however, argued that Holberg had killed Towery in the process of robbing him.
Key Witness’s Testimony Now Discredited
A crucial piece of evidence used to convict Holberg came from a confidential informant who had been in jail with her. The informant testified that Holberg had allegedly admitted to the killing and even bragged about it. However, what the jury did not know at the time was that this informant was working as a paid source for the Amarillo Police Department.
The prosecution failed to disclose this information during the trial, only revealing it after Holberg had already been sentenced. Years later, in a 2011 deposition, the informant recanted their testimony, stating that their statements had been coached and that they had provided false information to prosecutors in exchange for leniency in their own legal troubles.
Holberg’s legal team argued that this lack of disclosure violated her right to due process and unfairly influenced the jury’s decision. The Fifth Circuit agreed, ruling that the state’s suppression of this critical impeachment evidence prejudiced Holberg’s case.
What Happens Next?
With Holberg’s conviction and sentence now vacated, her case returns to the district court for further proceedings. It remains unclear whether prosecutors will seek a retrial or pursue other legal avenues.
Holberg, once one of the most well-known women on Texas death row, now faces an uncertain future, but this ruling marks a significant shift in a case that has spanned nearly three decades.
Implications of the Ruling
This decision underscores the importance of full disclosure in criminal trials, particularly when it comes to the credibility of key witnesses. Legal experts note that undisclosed agreements between prosecutors and informants can severely undermine the fairness of a trial, as demonstrated in Holberg’s case.
.jpeg)
