More

Cory Maples Should Not Face Death Penalty Due To Mailroom Mix-Up, Supreme Court Rules

Cory Maples

First Posted: 01/18/12 03:16 PM ET Updated: 01/18/12 04:34 PM ET

An Alabama death row inmate stymied by a law firm's egregious mail room mix-up will have the opportunity to appeal his death sentence, the Supreme Court ruled on Wednesday morning.

In 2001, Cory Maples thought he had won the lottery when he obtained the help of two attorneys at Sullivan & Cromwell, a prestigious New York law firm, to convince an Alabama trial court that his death sentence four years earlier was due to unconstitutionally bad lawyering. That luck, it turned out, was short-lived.

First, his two lawyers left the firm before the trial court decided if it would give Maples the postconviction relief he sought. Then, the court denied Maples that relief and sent notice to the New York law firm, unaware the attorneys no longer worked there. The firm, in turn, returned the notice unopened to the trial court clerk, who then proceeded to take no action.

Only after the state sent Maples a letter in prison that his time to appeal had expired did his mother call Sullivan & Cromwell to ask about her son's case. Egg on its face, the firm pleaded with the trial court to restart the appeal period. But by then, the damage had been done: All state and federal courts refused to excuse Maples for his attorneys' failure to file a timely appeal, communication breakdowns and mailroom blunders notwithstanding.

Those decisions relied on settled precedents that clients bear risk of their lawyers' negligence. Missing a filing deadline is a textbook example of such negligence that courts often refuse to excuse.

But the Supreme Court, siding with Maples in a 7-2 vote, found that the facts surrounding Maples' case amounted to more than simple attorney negligence. Maples, wrote Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg on behalf of the Court, had been effectively abandoned not only by the two New York lawyers, but also by the Alabama lawyer, John Butler, whom the lawyers had associated with in order to practice in Alabama. Butler, upon signing onto the case, told his colleagues that he would not make any actual contribution to the case, contrary to Alabama's requirement that local counsel be more than simple facilitators for out-of-state representation.

"That the minimal participation he undertook was inconsistent with Alabama law," Ginsburg wrote, "underscores the absurdity of holding Maples barred because Butler signed on as local counsel."

"Abandoned by counsel, Maples was left unrepresented at a critical time for his state postconviction petition, and he lacked a clue of any need to protect himself," Ginsburg continued. "In these circumstances, no just system would lay" the blame for Maples' missing the deadline to appeal at his "death-cell door."

The Court rarely takes cases that offer no opportunity to issue a broadly applicable rule of law, even if those cases present clear cases of injustice against specific individuals. But Maples' case presented such an extraordinary set of facts -- described in a short concurrence by Justice Samuel Alito as "a veritable perfect storm of misfortune, a most unlikely combination of events" -- that the Court intervened on Maples' behalf.

Responding to the decision, John Payton, the director-counsel of the NAACP Legal Defense & Educational Fund, told HuffPost that the ruling, despite its narrow application to Maples alone, "focuses attention on the larger issue that death should not be the consequence of someone having an inadequate lawyer."

This was precisely the point that seemed to motivate Justice Antonin Scalia, joined by Justice Clarence Thomas, in his dissent. Refusing to find that Maples had been abandoned by his lawyers, which also included the New York attorneys' superiors at the law firm, Scalia wrote that the majority's reasoning "invites future evisceration of the principle that defendants are responsible for the mistakes of their attorneys."

But there are mistakes, and then there are mistakes, emphasized Payton. "There are a lot of other eye-popping cases out there that are just heartbreaking for what went wrong," he said.

Also on HuffPost:

FOLLOW HUFFPOST POLITICS
Subscribe to the HuffPost Hill newsletter!
An Alabama death row inmate stymied by a law firm's egregious mail room mix-up will have the opportunity to appeal his death sentence, the Supreme Court ruled on Wednesday morning. In 2001, Cory Ma...
An Alabama death row inmate stymied by a law firm's egregious mail room mix-up will have the opportunity to appeal his death sentence, the Supreme Court ruled on Wednesday morning. In 2001, Cory Ma...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 473
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Post Comment Preview Comment
To reply to a Comment: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to.
View All
Favorites
Highlights
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (10 total)
10:14 PM on 01/22/2012
Reading the ruling gave me one more reason why I'm glad that I'm not poor in the south.
04:27 PM on 01/20/2012
Only Scalia and Thomas could try to hold that under the circumstances, all appeals should be barred. As for the "Rule" that attorneys' mistakes are the responsibility of incarcerated and possibly incompetent prisoners, such a thing is a barbarity!
09:09 PM on 01/22/2012
immoral men in black robes. Life should trumph all mistakes, and before the state takes a citizens life it should bend over backwards to make sure it is not due to clerical error, at the very least. Disgusted.
03:18 PM on 01/20/2012
i think when you have someones life and death in your hands - you better make sure you've dotted all your i's and crossed all your t's.....
photo
slash77
" You have failed me for the last time "
07:38 PM on 01/19/2012
“Justices, Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas, invites future evisceration of the principle that defendants are responsible for the mistakes of their attorneys."


This is one of the best examples of why there should be term limits on the Supreme Court......


How in the hell can defendants, who are not trained in law, be responsible for their lawyers mistakes.....is the patient also responsible for their doctor’s mistakes!!!!
07:33 PM on 01/19/2012
Scalia and Thomas, now that is an opinion worth less than a penny!
12:23 PM on 01/19/2012
CONCERNING:
"his two lawyers left the firm before the trial court decided
if it would give Maples the postconviction relief he sought.
Then, the court denied Maples that relief
and sent notice to the New York law firm, unaware the attorneys no longer worked there.
The firm, in turn, returned the notice unopened to the trial court clerk,
who then proceeded to take no action."

His lawyers didn’t care or left, court decided their arguments lacked merit, law firm didn’t care enough to have mail room check mail, court clerk didn’t care enough to pass on the lack of responsible party to receive notice.

Just a thought of warning here: If you are considering doing anything which might get you involved in the "justice" system, please remember that your property, freedom, life will depend on the proper actions of a number of people who really don't care if you live or die or if they do care, they might be stupid, hung-over, distracted or antagonistic at best.

Therefore, I recommend you not kill anyone, rob anyone, hang out with those who might or do any of those things which might get you ground up for years even if ultimately freed. Be sure it’s worth it ere you take that step.
05:26 PM on 01/19/2012
I would recommend that one not be accused of anything or even looking like someone who might be accused of something. You can go bankrupt defending yourself. The justice system is a highly profitable industry.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Rainey Allen
Southern by the grace of God
03:45 PM on 01/22/2012
It sure is. Rich folk buy their way out of convictions.
photo
Picachu
Facts Are Right Wing Kryptonite
10:53 AM on 01/19/2012
I am surprised Scalia didn't say as long as they used the correct postage he should die.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Mickey Ellis
09:34 AM on 01/19/2012
Scalia, what a total pig. Truly, a pig.
09:32 AM on 01/19/2012
So basically this is a ruling that the appeal (of the death sentence) time clock will restart. No where in the article does it state that the criminal wasnt guilty of his crime whatever it was. Lets hope justice (the death sentence) will prevail after yet ANOTHER review.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
11:43 AM on 01/19/2012
It (apparently) wouldn't matter to Scalia IF this man were, in fact, innocent

http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2009/08/17/56525/scalia-actual-innocence/?mobile=nc

If THAT doesn't make you question any agreement that you might EVER have with Scalia, you are beyond hope
07:43 PM on 01/20/2012
The merits of the murder case are not discussed in the article. Not knowing whether or not the man is guilty doesn't stop you from wishing death on him. Your words; "Lets hope justice (the death sentence) will prevail after yet ANOTHER review." Why?
09:24 AM on 01/19/2012
So basically any of the numbers of crooked and useless defense attorneys defending murderers and other criminals out there were just handed a precedent that will give extensions to their criminal clients. Nice job SCOTUS, Nice job SCOTUS!

Wonder how much the 7 were paid under the table (or under their robe) for this handout.
09:02 AM on 01/19/2012
THOMAS ASKS SCALIA OK, HOW DO WE VOTE. THOMAS HAS NEVER CAST A VOTE THAT SCALIA DIDNT AGREE WITH, TIME TO GET RID OF THEM BOTH.
09:26 AM on 01/19/2012
Why, cause they don't agree with Obama?
09:41 AM on 01/19/2012
IM SORRY I DIDNT KNOW SCALIA AND THOMAS HAD DISCUSSED THIS WITH OBAMA.
09:16 AM on 01/20/2012
OBAMA? WHAT ARE YOU A CHILD?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Howie Sheinfeld
07:28 PM on 01/19/2012
This weirdo dissent is par for the course for these two sadistic bozos. In 2008, in separate concurring opinions in Baze v. Rees, they said it's okay for states to mandate cruel methods of execution if they weren't thinking about the cruelty aspect while they were drafting the procedures.
08:38 AM on 01/19/2012
Scalia and his lap-dog thomas - the two worst uneducated "justices" ever - a disgrace to the legal profession
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
KELLI2L
08:25 AM on 01/19/2012
Isn't it already established that if a perps counsel doesn't show up "prepared" to defend them - the case would be re-scheduled; why would the court be allowed to go ahead with what would seem like an unfair conviction and death sentence no less.....

So, if this Supreme Court decision will improve the criminal court system - - that sounds like a good thing....
They should also keep in mind that the VICTIMs need more justice too!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Ted Martin
08:22 AM on 01/19/2012
What difference does it make, if he's guilty, then put him down, the hell with a technicality....
08:32 AM on 01/19/2012
While he is guilty and there are likely no compelling reasons to overturn the death penalty sentence, the "technicality" as you write is an extremely important one to look at....It is your and my right to due process (the 5th and 14th Amendment) which is of question.....This man in incidental......Justice will be served in his case......Basically, the court said I can still have my day in court if my attorney abandons me......
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
11:02 AM on 01/19/2012
I had a court appearance to make for a traffic violation (not alcohol related) about 20 years ago. I paid an attorney to represent me. I appeared for the appointment but, my lawyer did not. The judge was outraged and lucky me, through out my charges. Is that a case of abandonment?
08:39 AM on 01/19/2012
ted u must be a legal scholar or something. lol
JDSept
too much of everything is just enough
08:16 AM on 01/19/2012
It would seem when the mail was returned somebody might have noticed its importance?