Supreme Court gives hope to some death-row inmates
| Washington
The US Supreme Court has made it easier for some death row inmates to overcome a one-year statute of limitations for filing a federal appeal of their capital sentence.
The high court ruled 7 to 2 on Monday that under certain extraordinary circumstances courts should allow an appeal to be filed even after the one-year deadline has expired.
The decision came in the case of Florida death row inmate Albert Holland, who lost his right to file a federal appeal of his death sentence when his lawyer missed the one-year deadline established under the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (AEDPA).
In Holland鈥檚 case, a panel of the Eleventh US Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that his attorney鈥檚 conduct was not egregious enough to warrant setting aside imposition of the deadline.
The attorney would have to have acted with 鈥渂ad faith, dishonesty, divided loyalty, or mental impairment鈥� to be excused from the deadline. Negligence 鈥� even gross negligence 鈥� wasn鈥檛 enough, the appeals court said.
In reversing that decision, the Supreme Court said the appeals court鈥檚 standard was 鈥渢oo rigid.鈥�
鈥淲e have previously held that a garden variety claim of excusable neglect, such as a simple miscalculation that leads a lawyer to miss a filing deadline, does not warrant [an exemption from the deadline],鈥� Justice Stephen Breyer wrote in the majority opinion.
"But this case before us does not involve, and we are not considering, a garden variety claim of attorney negligence,鈥� he said. 鈥淩ather, the facts of this case present far more serious instances of attorney misconduct.鈥�
In Holland鈥檚 case, his court-appointed lawyer failed to file Holland鈥檚 appeal on time and appeared to be unaware of the date on which the appeal limitations period expired. This happened despite repeated letters and attempted communications by Holland with his lawyer, urging the lawyer to avoid running past the deadline. At one point the lawyer failed to communicate with Holland for several years despite letters from Holland pleading for information about his pending appeals.
鈥淗ere Holland not only wrote his attorney numerous letters seeking crucial information and providing direction; he also repeatedly contacted state courts, their clerks, and the Florida State Bar Association in an effort to have [his lawyer] 鈥� the central impediment to the pursuit of his legal remedy 鈥� removed from his case,鈥� Breyer wrote. 鈥淭he very day that Holland discovered that his AEDPA clock had expired due to [his lawyer鈥檚] failings, Holland prepared his own habeas petition鈥� and filed it with the district court.鈥�
The Supreme Court remanded the case back to the Eleventh Circuit to determine whether the facts surrounding Holland鈥檚 attempted appeal entitle him to an exemption from the deadline and a new opportunity to file his appeal in federal court.
In a dissent, Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas said AEDPA鈥檚 deadline should be strictly enforced. 鈥淭he court鈥檚 impulse to intervene when a litigant鈥檚 lawyer has made mistakes is understandable; the temptation to tinker with technical rules to achieve what appears a just result is often strong, especially when the client faces a capital sentence,鈥� Scalia wrote. 鈥淏ut the Constitution does not empower federal courts to rewrite, in the name of equity, rules that Congress has made.鈥�
Gerald Kogan, a former chief justice of the Florida Supreme Court and co-chair of the Constitution Project鈥檚 Death Penalty Committee, praised the high court鈥檚 decision.
鈥淢r. Holland should not face the death penalty without the opportunity to exhaust all potentially valid legal claims, and those claims should not be barred due to the gross negligence of his state-appointed attorney,鈥� Kogan said.
鈥淭his decision is a victory for basic fairness,鈥� said John Holdridge, director of the American Civil Liberties Union Capital Punishment Project. 鈥淒isturbingly, there are death row inmates who have not been able to file a federal habeas petition because their attorneys missed a filing deadline,鈥� he said. 鈥淔or the first time, the court has held that they will now have an opportunity to show that they should be allowed to file a petition if the deadline has passed because of attorney misconduct or gross negligence.鈥�
Holland was convicted in 1997 of first degree murder. After attacking and sexually assaulting a woman, Holland got into a scuffle with a police officer. He eventually grabbed the officer鈥檚 gun and shot him twice. Holland was sentenced to death and has been on Florida鈥檚 death row since his conviction.
Related:
