A MOTHER SAYS HER SON WAS FAILED IN GARZA COUNTY. COURT RECORDS CONFIRM HIS LAWYER ADMITTED A JURY SELECTION ERROR

A MOTHER SAYS HER SON WAS FAILED IN GARZA COUNTY. COURT RECORDS CONFIRM HIS LAWYER ADMITTED A JURY SELECTION ERROR

For more than a year, the mother of Kevin Earl Griffin says she has watched her son fight two battles from inside a Texas prison: one to overturn convictions he maintains are unjust and another to receive treatment for a serious seizure disorder.

“My son is innocent of this crime,” Griffin’s mother told The806er. “It’s a process that Kevin shouldn’t have had to go through.”

Her concerns include the attorney appointed to defend her son, a former school board president who served on his jury, evidence she says was never presented and a seizure she says Griffin experienced while testifying. She is also raising an urgent medical concern, alleging Griffin has suffered more than 600 seizures since entering state custody after prison medical providers discontinued two of his medications.

Some parts of her account are supported by public court records. Other allegations, particularly those concerning his medical treatment and events not addressed on direct appeal, have not been independently verified.

What court records confirm

The case stems from a meeting between Griffin and then Post Elementary School principal Dawn Jones on April 6, 2022. That date is important because the family’s original written account identified 2023, but appellate records establish that the encounter happened in 2022.

According to the Seventh Court of Appeals opinion, Griffin went to the school seeking help with concerns involving his son and the child’s mother’s boyfriend.

Griffin’s mother says he wanted his son to explain what had allegedly been happening inside the home. She says Griffin previously received calls from the school concerning his son’s absences and believed the principal would listen to the child.

Jones gave a substantially different account at trial.

She testified that Griffin became loud, displayed a knife while describing an earlier confrontation and made statements she understood as threats against her, her family and anyone who interfered with his relationship with his children. Griffin denied threatening Jones and maintained that he was demonstrating how the knife had been used during a separate confrontation.

The jury convicted Griffin of terroristic threat and aggravated assault on a public servant with a deadly weapon. He received sentences of 10 years and 14 years. Judge Reed A. Filley imposed the sentences on March 26, 2025.

The school board president who served on the jury

The most significant concern supported by the appellate record involves a juror who had served on the Post Independent School District Board for approximately 15 years.

Griffin’s mother says someone who had been inside the courtroom recognized the juror and contacted Griffin after the jury was selected. Griffin alerted his court appointed attorney, Arthur “Artie” Aguilar Jr.

The trial judge questioned the juror, identified in appellate filings as Kirkpatrick. The juror testified that he had no previous knowledge of Griffin’s case, despite serving on the school board when the alleged offense occurred.

Aguilar asked the judge to remove the juror and replace him with an alternate. The judge denied that request.

The appellate opinion confirms that Aguilar acknowledged making an error during jury selection.

“I should never have let the school board president on a case involving the school district,” Aguilar said on the record. He also stated that there was no strategic reason for failing to identify and strike the juror.

The Seventh Court of Appeals nevertheless upheld Griffin’s convictions. The court did not find that the attorney’s handling of the jury was proper. Instead, it ruled that Griffin’s appeal failed to prove the second requirement of an ineffective assistance claim: that the juror was actually biased and that replacing him probably would have changed the result.

The juror testified that he knew nothing about the case before being selected and had not been briefed about it by the school district. Because the appellate record contained no testimony establishing actual bias, the court ruled that Griffin had not demonstrated the required prejudice.

His mother says the problems went beyond the jury

Griffin’s mother says jury selection was only one part of what she believes went wrong.

She alleges Griffin was never provided a genuinely private place to consult with his appointed attorney during courthouse meetings. She says evidence Griffin wanted presented was never introduced and that no witnesses were called to testify on his behalf.

She also says Griffin suffered a seizure while testifying for a second time and that she had to stand and alert the judge after the prosecutor believed Griffin was refusing to answer questions.

Those allegations were not decided in the published appellate opinion.

Griffin’s direct appeal raised two main issues: ineffective assistance involving the school board juror and whether the evidence sufficiently established that Jones was performing an official duty as a public servant during the encounter.

The court found that Jones was acting in her capacity as principal while meeting with the parent of a student inside her school office. It affirmed both convictions on May 11, 2026.

Griffin then sought review from the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals. According to the official appellate docket, the state’s highest criminal court refused his petition for discretionary review on August 20, 2026.

A refusal does not mean the court issued a new ruling on every allegation raised by Griffin’s family. It means the court declined to grant discretionary review of the intermediate appellate decision.

The next legal step

Griffin’s family is now preparing an application for a writ of habeas corpus under Article 11.07 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure.

Unlike the direct appeal, an Article 11.07 proceeding can potentially address constitutional claims that depend on evidence outside the existing trial record. That could include affidavits, medical documentation, information about attorney consultations, evidence an attorney allegedly failed to investigate and testimony from witnesses who were not called at trial.

However, the family will still have to do more than identify mistakes. For an ineffective assistance claim, the application generally must establish what counsel failed to do, what additional evidence would have shown and why there is a reasonable probability that the result would have been different.

The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals provides the official Article 11.07 application. Because Texas restricts subsequent applications, Griffin’s family will need to ensure that every potentially supported claim and exhibit is carefully reviewed before filing.

More than 600 seizures alleged in custody

While the family challenges the convictions, Griffin’s mother says she is increasingly afraid for his physical safety.

She describes her son as a brain injury patient with a serious seizure disorder. She alleges that TDCJ discontinued two medications after telling Griffin they were considered controlled substances.

She claims Griffin has experienced more than 600 seizures since his incarceration began in March 2025.

“He cannot protect himself in prison if he’s having a seizure,” she said. “Kevin is a brain injury patient who needs all of his medicine to help fight his seizures.”

The806er has not independently reviewed Griffin’s prison medical records, medication administration records, seizure logs or grievance responses. The names and dosages of the discontinued medications were also not provided.

TDCJ’s official complaint process says relatives can report concerns about an incarcerated person’s medical treatment through the Patient Liaison Office at 936 437 4271. Medical confidentiality rules generally require the incarcerated patient to sign an authorization before officials can discuss treatment details with relatives.

TDCJ also instructs incarcerated patients to contact their treating professional, submit an I 60 or letter to the facility health administrator and use the medical grievance process if the concern remains unresolved. TDCJ explains that process here.

The medical complaint and the Article 11.07 application are separate matters. The writ challenges the legality of Griffin’s convictions and confinement. Concerns about his current treatment require medical records, grievances and potentially separate legal intervention.

For Griffin’s mother, however, the two fights are inseparable.

She believes her son should not be in prison, and she fears that every day he remains there without the medication she says previously controlled his seizures places him in greater danger.

She is now trying to assemble the records, affidavits and legal paperwork needed to place questions not resolved on direct appeal before the courts.

“I’ve tried reaching out to several people to help with this, but nobody can help,” she said. “So now we have to go through the process of all the paperwork.”

The appellate courts have upheld Griffin’s convictions, and the jury’s verdict remains legally valid. His mother is not asking the public to ignore those facts. She is asking whether the full story, including the evidence she says was never presented and the medical condition she says is worsening behind prison walls, has ever received a complete examination.