On the second day of its 2011 term, the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in Maples v. Thomas, an Alabama death penalty case. The SCOTUSblog case file contains all briefing.
The Washington Post preview is, "Supreme Court confronts case of death row inmate whose lawyers quit his case," by Robert Barnes.
Cory R. Maples was not surprised the day he heard that a court had rejected his challenge to his death sentence. “Down here, they’re pretty serious about it,” he said in a phone call from Alabama’s death row.
But the other news left him in “a state of shock”: the two lawyers from the prestigious New York law firm who had agreed to represent him had quit, quite some time before, without so much as a goodbye.
A clerk attempted to notify the lawyers of the court’s action, but the letters were returned unopened; Maples discovered that he had missed the deadline for appealing to the next level.
“I hate to use the word ‘abandonment,’ but that’s the closest I can get to it,” Maples said. “I’m supposed to have these two lawyers from this great firm that have my life in their hands, and now I find out that they’re not even on the case anymore.”
Maples’s case heads to the Supreme Court next week, and once again the justices will be called upon to examine the intricate legal apparatus that has been constructed to ensure that the death penalty in America is carried out fairly.
It comes as questions about capital punishment and the legal process are in the public eye, as illustrated by the outcry over the recent execution of Georgia inmate Troy Davis, who proclaimed his innocence to the end.
And:
Maples’s new attorney, Gregory G. Garre, who served as solicitor general in the administration of George W. Bush, told the justices in a brief that the case “raises the shocking prospect that a man may be executed without any federal court review of serious constitutional claims due to a series of events for which all agree he was blameless.”
"DEATH ROW MISTAKE: Maples v. Thomas," is part of Bill Mears' CNN preview of the term, "Big cases await U.S. Supreme Court's 2011-12 term."
AT ISSUE: Whether a missed deadline to file a key appeal is justification to grant a death row inmate a second chance when the error was not the prisoner's fault and the result would mean a punishment as serious as lethal injection.
THE CASE: Cory Maples was convicted in the 1995 murder of two companions. On appeal, Maples now claims two lawyers working pro bono for him eventually left their law firm without telling him or the state, leaving confusion over where required paperwork should have been directed. A state judge then refused Maples a chance to refile his appeals.
THE ARGUMENTS: Maples' current attorney says the criminal justice system has been turned on its head by allowing prisoners to suffer the consequences of their lawyers' mistakes or incompetence. But state attorneys argue that long-established rules on filing often complex paperwork must be strictly enforced to ensure that all parties -- including the courts-- get a proper chance to hear the claims in an orderly fashion.
THE IMPACT: Among the 34 states with the death penalty, Alabama alone does not automatically give all its 200-plus current capital inmates taxpayer-funded legal assistance to file papers challenging their convictions, sentences and lethal punishment. Big law firms often step in and tackle the long and expensive appeals process. This is another case in which the high court will examine the procedural aspects of capital punishment and whether death row inmates are being given a full and fair chance to press their post-conviction claims.
"A death row inmate deserves one last chance," is the title of a Washington Post editorial from the September 18 edition of the paper.
CORY MAPLES is not a sympathetic character. But even lawyers for the state of Alabama, where Mr. Maples sits on death row, acknowledge that “it is hard not to feel a little sorry for a petitioner like . . . Cory Maples, who loses his chance to assert claims in federal court because of his lawyers’ errors.”
And what errors they were.
And:
Alabama argues that lawyers make mistakes all the time that defendants have to live with. It cites a 1991 Supreme Court case that severely limited a defendant’s ability to overcome a lawyer’s errors, including missed filing deadlines. In our opinion, this decision in Coleman v. Thompson was harsh, bordering on punitive, and the court should rethink its holding.
Mr. Maples’s two lead lawyers did not merely make mistakes; they essentially abandoned their client. The Alabama court clerk’s office, too, shares responsibility for the pitiful series of events. All of this was beyond Mr. Maples’s control. It would offend the essence of fairness to allow a mailroom error to deprive a death row inmate of his last, best chance to avoid execution.
Earlier coverage of Maples v. Thomas begins at the link.
Comments