FORT WORTH, Texas – On Thursday the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, the state’s highest criminal court, dismissed the State of Texas’ petition to review a 2024 ruling that had overturned Crystal Mason’s conviction for illegal voting. The court’s brief order described its earlier decision to hear the case as “improvident,” effectively leaving Mason’s acquittal in place.
Background of the case
In 2018 Mason was convicted and sentenced to five years in prison after voting in the 2016 general election in Tarrant County while on supervised release from a felony conviction. She cast a provisional ballot after poll workers could not locate her registration. The ballot was never counted, but prosecutors charged her with illegal voting, arguing that she knowingly voted while ineligible.
The legal dispute centered on whether Mason knew she was ineligible. The provisional ballot affidavit she signed warned that a person on parole, supervision, or probation must have completed all punishment before voting, and that knowingly voting while ineligible is a felony. Mason testified she never read the warnings and was unaware of her ineligibility. Two election workers, however, testified that she read the form line‑by‑line, and Mason herself admitted at trial that she had “skimmed through” the information.
Changing the law during the appeal
While Mason’s case moved through the courts, Texas lawmakers amended the illegal‑voting statute to require evidence beyond a signed provisional‑ballot affidavit to prove a person knowingly voted while ineligible. The amendment applied to cases not yet final, including Mason’s.
In 2022 the Court of Criminal Appeals clarified that prosecutors must prove Mason not only knew she was on supervised release but also that she “actually realized” this made her ineligible to vote. The case was sent back to the Fort Worth Court of Appeals for reconsideration under the new standard.
Appellate courts reverse conviction
Two years later the Second Court of Appeals reversed Mason’s conviction, finding the evidence insufficient to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that she knowingly voted while ineligible. Four judges dissented from the Thursday dismissal, arguing the trial judge could infer that Mason read and understood the affidavit.
Judge Finley, joined by Judge Parker, wrote that the evidence was “clearly and unquestionably sufficient” and that the court should not have dismissed the State’s petition.
State’s response
In a statement, Tarrant County District Attorney Phil Sorrells reiterated the office’s commitment to enforce illegal‑voting laws fairly. “If there is evidence that someone knowingly violates our election laws in Tarrant County, we will investigate it and, when the evidence supports it, prosecute it,” Sorrells said, adding that the office’s responsibility is to protect the integrity of elections and pursue justice without fear or favor.
Reactions
Mason’s supporters hailed the decision as the end of a protracted legal fight. Dominique Alexander, president and CEO of the Next Generation Action Network, said the case was about “whether our justice system would allow a woman to lose five years of her freedom when the ballot at the center of the prosecution was never even counted.”
The ACLU of Texas, which joined Mason’s legal team, released a statement noting that Mason never lost faith in the justice system and expressed relief that the case was finally resolved.
“In all these years, I never lost my faith that justice would be done,” Mason said in a statement. “I am so happy my nightmare is over and I can move on.” She added that she hopes the case encourages others to make their voices heard and to vote, emphasizing that “if the right to vote weren’t so important, they wouldn’t be trying to take it away.”
Next steps
Mason, her legal team, and advocacy partners plan to hold a news conference on Friday to discuss the ruling and its implications for voting‑rights enforcement in Texas.
Original reporting: Dallas TX News (HLL/CB) — read the source article.
