Burnet County Judge could face once-dismissed criminal charges again, following appeals court decision
AUSTIN (KXAN) -- A new decision from the Third Court of Appeals could land the Burnet County Judge back in court on criminal charges that were previously thrown out.
Judge James Oakley faced several criminal accusations, including abuse of office, official oppression and tampering with evidence and was indicted in 2023. The claims centered around two different issues: his role as a Pedernales Electrical Cooperative board member while also serving as Burnet County judge and, separately, the handling of a vehicle collision in 2021.
Oakley was suspended from his position. He was ultimately reinstated, after a jury found Oakley not guilty of one charge and a visiting district judge, Dib Waldrip, granted Oakley's motions to quash several of the other charges.
Oakley originally asked the court to toss out the charges because the indictments didn't meet the necessary legal standard -- specifically, a part of due process called "fair notice" -- he argued.
However, a panel of judges from the Third Court of Appeals said Waldrip "erred" in his decision to quash the claims -- at least in part because it was based on reasons Oakley did not originally argue in his original motions. Oakley had originally asked the court to toss out the charges because the indictments didn't meet the necessary legal standard -- specifically, a part of due process called "fair notice."
The appeals court's opinion, filed earlier this month, ruled the charging documents in this case did serve as adequate notice under the law. It overturned Waldrip's orders and sent the case back down to the lower courts.
KXAN reached out to Waldrip for comment on this update and did not hear back.
Oakley's defense attorney, John Carsey, said he was "surprised" by their decision but stressed that it has nothing to do with Oakley's guilt or innocence.
In an email to KXAN, he wrote, "The original orders quashing the indictments were based solely on the charging instruments that were filed and had nothing to do with the evidentiary facts of the cases. We will be challenging the State to prove with evidence the allegations contained in the indictments."
He also said they plan to file a motion for a rehearing in front of the Court of Appeals.
He noted that he believes all of the claims against his client are "spurious," but especially the claims involving the 2021 vehicle collision.
"It involved a run-of-the-mill 'fender-bender' which occurred when Oakley was turning off of Hwy 71 onto the road to his house. Another vehicle was exiting a gas station and collided with the trailer which Oakley was towing. A portion of the bumper of the other vehicle was removed from the other vehicle in the collision. In order to clear the road of debris (as is required by state law) Oakley picked up the piece of the bumper and placed it next to the other vehicle. For this, he was ultimately indicted for the felony offense of Tampering with Physical Evidence," Carsey wrote.
The Burnet County District Attorney Sonny McAfee, however, told KXAN he does not take cases to grand juries that are "run-of-the-mill fender benders" and said this case was carefully reviewed before charging decisions were made.
The district attorney's office must decide to pursue the charges against Oakley, and McAfee told KXAN it is his intention to try the case. However, his term ends on Dec. 31 -- meaning the decision would fall to his successor, Perry Thomas, if the case has not resolved by the end of the year. That seems likely, McAfee said.
If Oakley's attorney files motion for a rehearing, the appeals court would also have to decide about reexamining the case before anything moved toward a trial in district court.
Still, McAfee maintains the cases are "certainly worth pursuing."