To induce states to comply, the bill uses both the carrot of financial incentives and the stick of subjecting any that fail to meet the minimum standards to more-skeptical federal court review than current law provides. This ingenious provision would be a far more sensible response to complaints about endless, repetitive death row apppeals than the procrustean cutbacks on appeal rights that we have seen in the past. Instead of proceeding on the demonstrably false assumption that state courts can be trusted to avoid unwarranted executions, the Innocence Protection Act would calibrate thedegree of federal court scrutiny to the willingness of states to provide competent defense counsel. T his provision rankles some states' rights conservatives. But those who have come to appreciate the case for federal oversight of state courts in matters of dimpled chads should reconsider the case for federal oversight of state courts in matters of life and death.
Horror stories abound.
Three defense lawyers in Houston slept through major portions of their clients' capital trials. Then the highest criminal appeals court in Texas upheld all three convictions. I have seen case after case in which the defense lawyer for a person facing the death penalty was denied an investigator and funds for expert assistance. A single-minded advocate of making sure that no criminal goes unpunished might object that good defense lawyers are a bad thing because they will sometimes fool jurors into letting clearly guilty defendants off the hook. Any reform to protect innocent defendants will benefit some guilty defendants as well.