gditor - Voice For The Defense Online

A recent Dallas Life Magwfile articleby Bm MinUtaglio attempts to exploreand expldn the motivaticms and psychologyof the "deatb row lawyer." Iil spiteof the photography (your's truly lookedmore lii a death raw candidate than adeath row lawyer), the article is thoughtinvoking,both for lawyea and the @nerdpublic. Though limited in approach,the article does address some of the majoraroblems of dwth wenaltv lam~inz. It- -viev. If that is to be accomplished, somethingliiust be done, probably IegisIatively,to pravide the reseurces required. Thepublic and the organized bar cannot son-~ uto e place the entire burden of deathrowrepres&tationon a fewlawy@rs whosecmfmitment wsts them dearly. If thepublic insists on the death penalty, andthose who are sentend accordingly @reafforded that complets review, then thelegislature should address the issue ofportrays the death ;ow {awyer as corn- how the tWo wquirements are to be me2.mitted, over-stressed and Wterpaid. It I have proposed, privately, that tha: Staterightly describes lawyers involved in should provide funding for legal counseld m penalty works as a clw-knit group, in death penalty cases, begianing Withbut knits the group a little roo tight. affirmance in the Court of Appeals-. ThereThere ate almost 180 inmates mw on would be title difficulty in designing adeath row in Texas. Capital c~ses are being symm fof appointment of counsel, rectdeaweek after week across fhis State. od keeping rsquirements, compensation'While the aaicle names 8 or 10 lawyers notes, and reporting responsibilities. Perw~mtlyactive in death penalty cases, hapa @is kind of appointment and comweknow there are many, many more pensation of counsel could be addressedthroughout this State who carry the same in the Effective Assistance of Counselburdens. Those other lawyers deserve Bill, which. win surely be introduced inequal recognition, and the appfeciafion of the upcuming sessian of the legidatute.the bar, genera!&, for accepting ;l respon- It appears reasonable to me that ifsibility which, in all fairness, below to avenues of review of a death penalty arethe entire bar.available to those whose resources payIt interested me that some of the law- for such, the State is obligd to provideyen interview~d had no moral convio the m e for indigent death raw inmates.tions against the death penalty, and some, At the present time, as many of yous%mingly, even favored capital punish- know, all publie resomces vmish at affirment.I suppose my own strong convic- mance by the Court ofctiminal Appeals.ticms in that area of thme had closed From that point forward, through atatemy eyes to the fact that criminal defense and federal post-conviction remedies,lawyers are a diverse group of individuals, counsel is pretty much on bis own. Someholdfmg differing view* and opinlons in expenses meg be covered by some mtianareas of human endeavor. I do hope, death penalfy group, hut more ohn thanhowever, that criminal defense lawyers not, the lawyer simply absmbs them as anare of a single mind when it comes to the aaded cost of doing pm bow business.proposition that every death row inmate Adding to the expenses(traue1, telephone,is entitled to a complete and detailed secretwial, printin&, duplication, etc.) thereview of his case, by every legitimate countless hours donated by couml, thetribunal and to co~nsel who will compe- ~ c i impact ~ of l death row lawyering istentiy and energetically pursue that re- evident. Adore than anything else, it is theprospect the future holds (for sttes$ulhours and economie burdens) that causeslawyers to shy away from capital Eases,a6 tritio. Something sbouId be done torectify thi~ situation, and the time is ripefor action.Without a doubt thissession of the legislaturewill addregs ?smes involving themanagement and direction of the TorasDepartment of Corrections, the role ofthe Board of Pardons and Patoles, senteaciagpractices and judicial adminiattatian.The topic of effective counsel for deathcow inmates and compensation of suchcounsel is current and important.The idea that Tong, dragged-out appealsfor death low inmates are just designed tomake lawyers ri&" as voiced in areeentdwih AmeMm-Statessmart "letter to theeditor" should be di~pelled once and forall. But lawyers who work to provide theteprwentation for the inmates should befairly compensated. Yon can bet yourbottom dollar that ths doctor who performsthe appendectomy on a death rowinmate is f&y and promptly compensated,as is the drmtbt who pulls his tooth.Lawyers desexve no less.A well-placed suggestion to your senatorox legislator may move this idea tofruition.Until December,S@WPY