Neal Robbins was convicted in the 1998 death of his girlfriend’s daughter. Robbins appealed after Texas passed a 2013 statute allowing for convictions to be overturned if “junk science” was used to convict the defendant. The question before the court was whether the law applied to whole fields that have since been discredited (such as bite-mark testimony), or if the law can apply to an individual expert who recants their testimony after a defendant is convicted. The medical examiner in this case originally labeled the victim’s death a homicide due to asphyxiation, but years later, she admitted that she should have labeled the cause of death as “undetermined.” The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals ruled in favor of the defendant, granting him a new trial.