Context:

Nearly 18 years after a double homicide outside a Texas recording studio, a man faces execution amid competing narratives of responsibility. Prosecutors say he pulled the trigger, while defense lawyers argue the confession is unreliable and point to DNA suggesting a different shooter. They also contend prosecutors used race-based jury removal, and have pressed for relief on constitutional grounds. Officials have denied a reprieve, leaving the execution on track unless last-minute stays succeed. The case hinges on contested evidence, potential missteps in trial conduct, and unresolved questions about who actually committed the crime.

Dive Deeper:

• In 2008, two men were shot and killed outside a recording studio in Garland, Texas, leading to the death sentence for James Broadnax; his cousin Demarius Cummings received life without parole.

• Broadnax’s defense argues Cummings confessed to being the shooter and that DNA on the weapon and on a victim’s belongings points to someone other than Broadnax, suggesting the state’s conclusions may be misattributed.

• The defense also maintains Broadnax was under the influence of drugs during interviews and that prosecutors used his rap lyrics to portray him as dangerous to justify a death sentence.

• A key contention is that prosecutors eliminated potential Black jurors during selection, an approach the defense claims violated Batson v. Kentucky and the Equal Protection Clause.

• Several high-profile supporters, including prominent rappers, filed briefs with the Supreme Court, though the court declined to intervene on these questions or on related forensic evidence presented at trial.

• The Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles denied Broadnax a reprieve or commutation, and the state Attorney General described Cummings’ confession as questionable evidence, setting the stage for the execution to proceed.

• If carried out, Broadnax would be among Texas’ executions for the year, with families of the victims publicly urging the process to move forward.