Romi Frentescu said he fired after being attacked with a knife and a punch, but prosecution witnesses described a different sequence.
WACO, Texas — The central question in Romi Frentescu’s capital murder trial was not whether he shot Michael David Morris and Morris’ teenage son. It was whether the gunfire was lawful self-defense, as Frentescu insisted, or an intentional double killing, as prosecutors argued.
A McLennan County jury resolved that dispute against Frentescu on Aug. 12, convicting the 33-year-old former motorcycle-group officer of capital murder in the October 2024 deaths of Morris, 38, and Braxton Johnson, 18. Jurors deliberated for roughly an hour. Because prosecutors had already decided not to seek the death penalty, Frentescu received the mandatory alternative sentence of life in prison without parole. The short deliberation followed a trial in which jurors heard substantially different versions of the same roadside confrontation — including disputes over a knife, Frentescu’s position when he fired, Johnson’s movements and what Frentescu intended when he led Morris toward the rural intersection.
Frentescu’s explanation began with what he described as a long-running campaign of intimidation. He testified that Morris had harassed him on previous occasions and had threatened his family, his home and his dog. Frentescu said the trouble continued on the day of the shooting when Morris passed his home, revved an engine and made an obscene gesture. He acknowledged that he then rode toward Morris’ residence and later continued to Mackey Ranch Road and Old Moody Road. Morris followed. Frentescu told jurors he was trying to get Morris to stop the harassment and believed a direct conversation might end the conflict. Prosecutors viewed those same movements as evidence that Frentescu deliberately created the confrontation.
Once the men stopped, Frentescu said, the exchange developed into a physical fight. He testified that Morris struck him and then produced a switchblade. According to Frentescu, the appearance of the knife transformed a fistfight into a potentially lethal attack. He said Johnson then hit him in the head, knocking him to his knees and affecting his ability to stand or retreat. Frentescu testified that he drew his handgun while attempting to get away and opened fire only because he believed Morris and Johnson were advancing. His attorneys told jurors that he had been placed in a situation where he reasonably feared death or serious injury.
Brian Pugh, a friend of Morris who was present, described the scene differently. Pugh said he, Morris and Johnson had recently returned to Morris’ home after helping a friend with a motorcycle when Frentescu rode nearby and revved his motorcycle. Morris followed Frentescu on a motorcycle while Pugh and Johnson followed in Morris’ pickup. At the intersection, Pugh said, Frentescu and Morris appeared ready for a fistfight. Johnson got out of the truck and ran toward his father, calling to him. Pugh testified that Morris lowered one fist, turned toward Johnson and raised a hand as if telling him to stop. At that point, Pugh said, Frentescu moved back, pulled the pistol and fired.
Pugh told jurors he never saw the knife Frentescu said Morris had brandished. He also challenged Frentescu’s description of being down on the pavement when the gunfire began. Pugh testified that Frentescu was standing and fired several shots. Medical examiners provided evidence about the wounds that killed the two men. Johnson suffered a fatal chest wound, while Morris was struck in the torso. The medical testimony gave jurors physical evidence to consider alongside the competing eyewitness descriptions, but the central legal conflict remained one of circumstances: whether Frentescu reasonably responded to an armed attack or intentionally shot two people during a confrontation he helped bring about.
The events immediately after the shooting supplied another point of contrast. Pugh testified that Frentescu turned the gun toward him, forcing him to seek cover around Morris’ truck and trailer. Pugh tried to drive away and ran over Frentescu’s motorcycle in the process. Frentescu left in a red pickup. Pugh then returned to the wounded father and son as passing motorists stopped. Dorothy Sanders, a nurse with the Department of Veterans Affairs, began CPR on Morris after coming upon what she initially thought was an accident. Witnesses said Frentescu returned in the red pickup while Sanders was trying to keep Morris alive.
Sanders testified that Frentescu ordered her to stop the resuscitation effort and threatened to shoot her if she continued. Pugh and another area resident gave their own accounts of Frentescu demanding that aid stop. Another motorist, William Weaver, testified that he and his wife had mistaken the scene for a wreck and that an armed man who arrived in the red truck ordered him not to move. Weaver said he backed away and left. Prosecutors argued that Frentescu’s alleged return to the scene and behavior toward people trying to help were relevant to jurors’ assessment of his intent and state of mind. Frentescu said on the stand that he did not remember talking to Sanders.
The state also questioned why Frentescu had chosen direct confrontation if, as he said, Morris had repeatedly made serious threats. Prosecutor Christi Hunting Horse confronted him with the fact that he had not called police about the prior incidents he described. Prosecutors argued that he instead rode to Morris’ residence and positioned himself at another intersection where Morris followed him. A jail witness offered more direct support for that theory, testifying that Frentescu later spoke about drawing Morris out in a manner he compared to using bait. Frentescu denied making that admission, giving jurors another credibility dispute to resolve.
Defense attorneys attacked the prosecution theory by stressing the undisputed hostility between the men. Morris belonged to the Cossacks 1%ers, a splinter group, while Frentescu had served as secretary of the Ugly Man Cossacks. A Texas Department of Public Safety gang expert testified about conflict between the organizations and how behavior such as revving a motorcycle outside another member’s home could be viewed as an intentional insult. The defense said the history made Morris’ alleged threats and aggression believable. Prosecutors, meanwhile, argued that the same rivalry supplied a motive for Frentescu to lure Morris into a fight away from his residence.
The expert also testified about a hostile directive involving members of the splinter faction, adding context to the animosity between the two sides. But jurors still had to decide Frentescu’s individual criminal responsibility rather than the guilt or conduct of either organization as a whole. The prosecution sought to keep that focus on the choices made during the confrontation: following one another, stopping at the intersection, fighting, producing the handgun and firing. The defense likewise focused on the immediate sequence, arguing that whatever happened before the fight did not erase Frentescu’s right to protect himself once he allegedly faced a knife and was struck in the head.
Frentescu’s decision to testify gave jurors the unusual opportunity to compare his explanation directly with the eyewitnesses who contradicted him. He acknowledged firing but denied that the killings were planned. He denied the jail witness’s account of an admission and said he did not remember threatening the nurse. Pugh, by contrast, placed Frentescu on his feet when he fired, denied seeing Morris armed with a knife and described being threatened himself afterward. Sanders described a separate confrontation after the shooting. The state asked jurors to view those independent accounts together; the defense argued that the chaotic roadside encounter supported reasonable doubt about the prosecution’s version.
Frentescu had been arrested soon after the October 2024 killings, and McLennan County records show that he was indicted on capital murder later that year. His trial began in Waco in August 2026. Other allegations arising from the investigation included aggravated assault with a deadly weapon, evidence tampering and a terroristic threat, but the capital murder count controlled the ultimate punishment. Texas law permitted the state to pursue capital murder because two people were killed during the same criminal episode. Prosecutors elected not to seek execution, leaving life without parole as the sentence if the jury found him guilty.
It did. After hearing Frentescu’s claim that he was on the ground defending himself, Pugh’s account that he was standing and shooting, testimony that no knife was seen by key prosecution witnesses and evidence about Frentescu’s actions before and after the gunfire, jurors returned a capital murder verdict. Frentescu was sentenced to spend the rest of his life in prison without parole. No public reporting located through Sept. 22 showed that the verdict or sentence had since been set aside.
Author note: Last updated Sept. 22, 2026.