The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 1984 that criminal defendants are entitled not just to have a lawyer, but an effective one. In recent years, Texas courts have ruled that defendants received an adequate defense even though their lawyers napped in court, had previously prosecuted their client, had a personal relationship with a prosecution witness or had been suspended or disbarred. While recent national polls show most Americans continue to favor the death penalty, the margin of support has slipped. Texans support the death penalty on the assumption it is administered fairly. Even some supporters of the death penalty have expressed reservations about how it is applied and concerns that some innocent people may have been executed.
Critics say such concerns are well-founded.
It is a mistake to assume that we are now seeing just several isolated instances,'' said Nancy Gist, director of the Bureau of Justice Assistance at the Department of Justice in Washington, which recently sponsored a national conference on indigent defense. She pointed to findings in Illinois that 13 death row inmates had been wrongfully convicted and a recent Columbia University study that found widespread problems in the application of the death penalty. System changes In 1995, the Texas Legislature tried to improve the system representation by requiring the state's nine judicial districts to set minimum standards for lawyers appointed to death penalty cases and to post a list of those attorneys. But the standards vary widely from county to county and the lists often are not updated or monitored. Judges occasionally ignore the lists completely.