HOUSTON—If there was ever a case in Harris County that many felt warranted the death penalty, it was the case of Juan Quintero.

Quintero, an illegal immigrant with a criminal background, shot and killed a beloved police officer, Rodney Johnson, from the back of a squad car.

But a jury sentenced him not to death, but to life behind bars.

Johnson’s widow was not pleased when she learned of the jury’s 10-to-two decision.

“My husband’s life meant nothing. He died in vain,” Jocelyn Johnson said.

Cindy Bradford was one of the two jurors who voted in favor of the death penalty. She worries the life sentence sends the wrong message.

“You can enter the country illegally, be deported because of inappropriate acts with a child, come back in the country under the radar and execute a police officer, and we’re telling them that’s OK,” Bradford said.

When considering the death penalty, a jury is faced with two questions: Does the defendant pose a danger in the future, and are there mitigating circumstances?

11 News photo

Juan Quintero

All of the jurors agreed Quintero posed a danger in the future, but they differed on the mitigating circumstances.  That meant an automatic life sentence for the convicted murderer.

Quintero can thank his attorney for that.

“When she brought in people who had known this young man all of his life and talked about a traumatic head injury. He had a Roman Catholic nun testifying on his behalf. You had medical experts testifying that this type of injury could cause this type of problem,” 11 News legal expert Gerald Treece said.

Bradford argues that if the death penalty requires a unanimous vote, the same should hold true for life behind bars.

But that is an issue for the state legislature, not the courts.