Keith S. Hampton
Private Practice Lawyer
Email:
click here to contact
Practice Areas
Criminal Law Exclusively and in All Areas
|
Admitted
|
1989, Texas
|
|
Law School
|
St. Mary's University of San Antonio, J.D.
|
|
College
|
University of Texas at Austin
|
|
Member
|
Texas Criminal Defense Lawyers Association, State Bar, Texas Bar Foundation, Austin Criminal Defense Lawyers Association
|
|
Biography
|
Named a "super-lawyer" beginning in 2003 in Texas Monthly and Law and Politics Magazine, Hampton's work has been repeatedly recognized as superior by his peers. He won the Texas Criminal Defense Lawyers Association President's Award in 2002, 1999 and 1993 as well as the Ambassador Award from the Austin Criminal Defense Lawyer Association in 1999. He was the lobbyist for the Texas Criminal Defense Lawyers Association from 1995-2005. He had previously served on the Association's Amicus Committee as well as Governor Bush's Ad Hoc Advisory Committee to Revise the Code of Criminal Procedure. Keith has won numerous awards, including the President's Award for the Texas Criminal Defense Lawyers Association, the Ambassador Award from the Austin Criminal Defense Lawyers Association, and was named an "Unsung Hero" by the Austin Chronicle. In 2008, Keith was voted "Best Lawyer of the Year". Keith also served on the Governor's Ad Hoc Committee to Revise the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure, the Legislative Task Force for the Rewrite of the Incompetency and Insanity Statutes, and the Texas Supreme Court Jury Task Force. Hampton is a prolific author and well-published. His articles include Children in the War on Crime: Texas Sex Offender Mania and the Outcasts of Reform, 42 S.Tex.L.Rev. 781 (2002) and The Parole Law Instruction and Jury Misconduct, 23 Tex.Tech.L.Rev. 773 (1993) and some of which have been cited in such journals as Harvard Journal on Legislation, Oklahoma Law Review, and Vanderbilt Law Review. His latest article, Driving Through the Wasteland of Unregulated Roadway Police Powers: Will Reasonable Officers Ever Rescue Us?, will be published this spring. He is appellate counsel in over 30 published cases, including Ex parte Tuley and State v. Murray, both of which resulted in the freedom of innocent persons. Some of his cases are: Dyar v. State, No. 1794 (Tex.Crim.App., 2003); Ex parte Tuley, 109 S.W.3d 388 (Tex.Crim.App. 2002); State v. Patrick, 86 S.W.3d 592 (Tex.Crim.App. 2002); Wiley v. State, 74 S.W.3d 399 (Tex.Crim.App. 2002); Ex parte Geiken, 28 S.W.3d 553 (Tex.Crim.App. 2000); Wincott v. State, 59 S.W.3d 691 (Tex.App. Austin 2001, State's pet. ref'd); State v. Laird, 38 S.W.3d 707 (Tex.App. Austin 2000, State's pet. ref'd); Frost v. State, 25 S.W.3d 395 (Tex.App. Austin 2000, no pet.); State v. Read, 965 S.W.2d 74 (Tex.App. Austin 1998); Carmona v. State, 941 S.W.2d 949 (Tex.Crim.App. 1997); Zinger v. State, 932 S.W.2d 511 (Tex.Crim.App. 1996); Edmonson v. State, 943 S.W.2d 211 (Tex.App. Austin 1997); Francis v. State, 877 S.W.2d 441 (Tex. App. Austin 1994, pet. ref'd); Ortega v. State, 860 S.W.2d 561 (Tex.App. Austin 1993); Jackson v. Sharp, 846 S.W.2d 144 (Tex.App. Austin 1993). Fellow: Texas Bar Foundation. Board Certified, Criminal Law, Texas Board of Legal Specialization
AV Rated, Board Certified Criminal Attorney with over 20 Years of Practice in Criminal Law
|
|
Born
|
Kansas City, Missouri
|
|
Reported Cases
|
Panetti v. Quarterman, 127 S.Ct. 2842 (2007) (this was a decision by the United States Supreme Court regarding the level of competency necessary before a person could be executed); Foster v. Quaterman, 446 F.3d 359 (5th Cir. 2006) (this decision by the federal court of appeals in New Orleans concerned, among other things, the death penalty and the law of parties); Miles v. State, 241 S.W.3d 28 (Tex.Crim.App. 2007) (this case involved the extent of the exclusionary rule to private action); Tuck v. State, 215 S.W.3d 411 (Tex.Crim.App. 2007) (this decision reaffirmed the right of indigent persons to a free record for appeal); Dyar v. State, 124 S.W.3d 460 (Tex.Crim.App. 2003) (this was a DWI case concerning whether a hospital could be considered a "suspicious place" justifying police action); State v. Patrick, 86 S.W.3d 592 (Tex.Crim.App. 2002) (this was a death penalty case in which the State sought to stop DNA testing); Wiley v. State, 74 S.W.3d 399 (Tex.Crim.App. 2002) (this decision focused on the right to present a defense that another person was responsible for the crime); Ex parte Geiken, 28 S.W.3d 553 (Tex.Crim.App. 2002) (this was a major decision regarding due process rights of prisoners); Tucker v. State, 990 S.W.2d 261 (Tex.Crim.App. 1999) (this decision regarded the preservation of appellate complaints).
|
|
ISLN
|
915381058
|
|