A Texas jury has sentenced former Catholic priest Anthony Odiong to life in prison after convicting him on three counts of sexual assault. The verdict, returned in Waco, marks a significant application of a Texas law that criminalizes the misuse of clergy authority to coerce or exploit another person into sexual conduct.
Under Texas Penal Code § 22.011(b)(10), it is a felony for a clergy member to use a position of spiritual authority to cause someone to submit to or participate in a sexual act. This case underscores how prosecutors are increasingly willing to use that statute to pursue accountability in cases involving religious abuse.
More broadly, the case reflects a growing legislative trend across the United States: states are expanding legal pathways for addressing sexual abuse, assault, and exploitation committed by clergy and other authority figures in religious settings. As those laws continue to evolve, institutions should pay close attention to how they respond to allegations, reporting obligations, and potential liability.
The Allegations
Odiong served in Austin, Texas, from 2006 to 2012 and later in New Orleans, Louisiana, from 2015 to 2023. According to reports, the Diocese of Austin received complaints about his behavior in 2011, but he remained in ministry until 2012. The Archdiocese of New Orleans was not informed of those complaints until 2019.
Church officials in New Orleans later stated that they did not notify the faithful because the allegations involved adults rather than minors and that they initially addressed the concerns directly with Odiong. He was ultimately removed from ministry in 2023, and additional reported information was later passed on to law enforcement.
Public attention intensified after The Guardian published an investigative report in February 2024 detailing accusations from women who described sexual coercion, unwanted touching, and abusive financial control while Odiong was acting in his role as a priest. Following that report, additional women came forward to police with allegations of sexual assault.
How the Case Reached Trial
Odiong was initially arrested in 2024 on charges related to child pornography discovered during the broader investigation into allegations made by multiple women. Those allegations spanned several years and involved conduct in both Texas and Louisiana, including claims that assaults were carried out either directly or through coercion of others.
Ordinarily, many of the allegations would have faced statute-of-limitations barriers in Texas, where the limitations period for adult sexual assault cases is generally ten years. But Texas law includes an exception for alleged serial predators: if prosecutors can show that the accused victimized five or more people, the limitations period may not apply.
Prosecutors argued that exception applied here, allowing the case to move forward. Odiong was ultimately charged with one count of first-degree sexual assault and two counts of second-degree sexual assault.
What Happened at Trial
The jury trial took place in Waco, Texas. Prosecutors focused on the three victims connected to the charges, although one of those victims did not testify during the proceedings.
One of the more notable pieces of testimony came from a Jane Doe who said Odiong instructed her to allow her then-husband to engage in painful intercourse in order to save her marriage, and then to report the details back to him. Prosecutors treated that allegation as part of the broader misuse of spiritual authority, arguing that Odiong’s role as a religious advisor was central to the coercion.
After three days of testimony and roughly two hours of deliberation, the jury found Odiong guilty on all counts.
Sentencing
On June 2, after approximately 90 minutes of deliberation, the jury sentenced Odiong to life in prison on the first-degree sexual assault count. He also received two concurrent 20-year sentences for the second-degree sexual assault counts, along with fines.
According to one juror, the consistency in the victims’ accounts made the decision straightforward. The juror reportedly said the panel did not view probation as appropriate given the number of victims and the repeated nature of the conduct described at trial.
Why This Case Matters
This case points to a broader shift in how legislatures are approaching abuse committed under the guise of spiritual, pastoral, or counseling authority. Laws like Texas Penal Code § 22.011(b)(10) reflect an effort to recognize that coercion can take forms beyond physical force, particularly when trust, faith, or institutional power are involved.
It is also notable that this case highlights potential liability for indirect or proxy conduct, not just direct physical acts. As more states revisit how they regulate clergy misconduct and institutional responsibility, religious organizations and other private institutions should remain attentive to mandated-reporting rules, notice requirements, and the legal consequences of failing to respond promptly to allegations.
If you have questions about clergy misconduct claims, reporting requirements, institutional liability, or related legal matters affecting religious organizations, please contact Michael A. Airdo at mairdo@airdowerwas.com or Gabrielle E. Moore at gmoore@airdowerwas.com.
