NCJ Number
138064
Journal
National Law Journal Volume: 12 Issue: 40 Dated: (June 11, 1990) Pages: 30- 44
Date Published
1990
Length
15 pages
Annotation
In a 6-month survey of the defense of capital murder suspects in six southern States, the National Law Journal found that these trials fail to meet the U.S. Supreme Court standard of meticulous fairness and care. In many cases, the trial outcome is determined by the skill of defense attorneys, which in turn depends on the system that selects them, pays them, and gives them what they need to mount an effective defense.
Abstract
Indigent defendants are often represented by poorly trained and underpaid lawyers. Congress is currently debating schemes to limit Federal court review of State death penalty convictions, which would remove the historical safety net for catching errors in the system. In examining trial transcripts and conducting interviews with defense lawyers, judges, prosecutors, and experts in capital law, the National Law Journal found that trial lawyers who represent defendants in these States have been disbarred, suspended, or otherwise disciplined at a far higher rate than other lawyers in those States. More than half the defense counsels were handling their first capital trials when their clients were convicted. The survey found that statutory fee limits on defense representation act as disincentives to thorough trial preparation; there are often inadequate or nonexistent standards for appointment of counsel and standards that do exist are often ignored by the judges; capital trials are often completed in a matter of days; and penalty phases are usually concluded within several hours. Finally, the Supreme Court test for ineffective assistance of counsel is itself ineffective, making it nearly impossible for death row inmates to challenge their lawyers' competence.