home

Supreme Court Takes Death Case Involving Ineffective Counsel

By Jeralyn, Section Court Decisions
Posted on Mon Nov 18, 2002 at 10:56:16 AM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

Some good news out of the Supreme Court today. It has agreed to hear a death row case where the issue is ineffective assistance of counsel:

"The Supreme Court broadened its review of the death penalty Monday, agreeing to consider when death row inmates with bad lawyers deserve a second chance."

This is critical because bad lawyering is a chief cause of wrongful convictions. According to the Innocence Project:

"Mirroring prosecutorial misconduct, ineffective or incompetent defense counsel have allowed men and women who might otherwise have been proven innocent at trial to be sent to prison. Failure to investigate, failure to call witnesses, inability to prepare for trial (due to caseload or incompetence), are a few examples of poor lawyering. The shrinking funding and access to resources for public defenders and court appointed attorneys is only exacerbating the problem."

The Innocence Project lists some policy suggestions that would help remedy the problem of bad lawyering:

"Ensuring adequate pay for public defenders and competitive fees for court appointed attorneys would attract competent attorneys to staff these offices and take cases. Public defenders and prosecutors in any given area should receive commensurate pay.

Caseloads for public defenders should never exceed the standards of the National Legal Aid and Defenders Association. If attorneys are forced to proceed with too many cases, ethical complaints should be lodged with the appropriate state bar.

Every jurisdiction should establish standards of adequate defense. The public should be informed and educated about the requirements of an adequate defense. Standards would also provide notice to all defense attorneys of how much work is expected of them.

Federal funds for defense services should be relative to the amount of funding provided to prosecutors' offices in any given jurisdiction. "

Update:

Here is a more detailed explanation of the case and its importance from a press release of the National Coalition to Abolish the Death Penalty:

"The U.S. Supreme Court announced today it will
review the claim of a Maryland person on death row who has argued
that his legal representation at the sentencing phase of his trial
was so inadequate and ineffective it violated his rights under
the U.S. Constitution.

The court could use the case involving Kevin Wiggins to revisit
its 1984 ruling in Strickland v. Washington, which set a low
standard for determining what constitutes ineffective assistance
of counsel.

"We know that the death penalty is not reserved for the worst
crimes, but rather for people with the worst lawyers," said
Steven W. Hawkins, executive director of the National Coalition
to Abolish the Death Penalty. "The U.S. Constitution does not
only guarantee a lawyer to a person on trial for a felony
offense. It also guarantees an effective lawyer. The standard
established by the Court in Strickland is not adequate. The
Court will now have an opportunity to revisit this standard."

In Strickland, the Court established a two-pronged approach
to the issue of whether a lawyer's performance was legally
effective or ineffective. The Court held that the defendant
must show that counsel's performance was deficient and that
the deficient performance deprived the defendant of a fair
trial.

Wiggins' new attorneys maintain that his trial lawyer did not
adequately investigate his client's background and did not
present to the jury evidence of borderline mental retardation
and severe childhood abuse, including the fact that Wiggins
was beaten, raped and burned as a child.

The chief judge of the conservative 4th U.S. Circuit Court of
Appeals, J. Harvie Wilkinson III, said he had doubts about
Wiggins' guilt, but that Maryland's governor should decide
whether to commute his sentence. "My own view is that
(Wiggins) very probably committed the heinous offense for
which he stands convicted," the judge wrote. "But I cannot
say with certainty that he did so." "

< Search Warrant for E-mails Upheld | Secret FISA Appeals Court Reverses and Allows Expanded Wiretaps >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Supreme Court Takes Death Case Involving Ineffective Counsel | 0 comments ( topical)