On January 18, the U.S. Supreme Court (7-2) ordered a new hearing in federal court for Cory Maples, an Alabama death row inmate whose state and federal appeals had been rejected by lower courts because his lawyers quit and missed a critical filing deadline. Writing for six of the Court’s Justices, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg highlighted the poor quality of representation offered by the state in death penalty cases. The opinion stated, “Alabama sets low eligibility requirements for lawyers appointed to represent indigent capital defendants at trial…. Appointed counsel need only be a member of the Alabama bar and have ‘five years’ prior experience in the active practice of criminal law.’ Experience with capital cases is not required.” Justice Ginsburg also noted that Alabama is nearly alone in not guaranteeing representation in post-conviction proceedings, electing instead “to rely on the efforts of well-funded [out-of-state] volunteers.” Finally, the opinion emphasized that appointed counsel in death penalty cases are severely under compensated by the state: “Although death penalty litigation is plainly time intensive, the State capped at $1,000 fees recoverable by capital defense attorneys for out-of- court work. Even today, court-appointed attorneys receive only $70 per hour.” The Court finally noted that "On occasion, some prisoners sentenced to death receive no postconviction representation at all." Maples's underlying claim, which he was prevented from appealing because his absent lawyers missed the deadline, was that he received ineffective representation at trial. Neither of his trial counsel had ever tried the penalty phase of a capital case.
A recent study of the death penalty in Nevada compared the costs of defending capital and non-capital murder cases. The study, conducted by Dr. Terance Miethe of the Department of Criminal Justice at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas, looked at the time spent by defense attorneys at various stages of a case. The study’s findings included: 
Following the recent handing down of a death sentence in Philadelphia, the Executive Director of the Atlantic Center for Capital Representation blamed the outcome on an inadequate indigent-defense system. Marc Bookman (pictured), writing in the Philadelphia Inquirer, reviewed the case and found, "There isn't a single motion filed by the attorneys in defense of their client. Nor is there a request for a jury questionnaire, which is standard in most jurisdictions that regularly handle capital cases, or for a mitigation specialist to prepare a case against the death penalty. Indeed, the only motion in the record was handwritten by the defendant. Prison logs indicate that his lawyers visited him a total of three times." Bookman said that such ineffective representation is the norm in Philadelphia capital cases because of "grossly inadequate" pay for court-appointed lawyers. "In other words," he wrote, "if we're asking attorneys to work for next to nothing, we are likely to get next to nothing from them." Read the full op-ed below.
An Op-Ed signed by eleven current and former Kentucky prosecutors calls for reforms to Kentucky's death penalty, in light of the recent report issued by the American Bar Association. The ABA report was released in December after a two-year study of fairness and accuracy in capital cases in Kentucky. The prosecutors cite Kentucky's "unacceptable" 60% error rate in death sentencing, saying "As a matter of basic fairness, we must pause to understand and reform the way capital punishment is administered in our state." They recommend a suspension of executions until reforms are implemented, in order to ensure a fair process. Among their suggestions for reform are a proposal currently being considered by the state legislature that would exempt severly mentally ill defendants from the death penalty. Other recommendations include preservation and testing of biological evidence, increased funding for indigent defense, and revision of jury instructions. They conclude, "The hallmark of our criminal justice system is that its process is fair and its results are reliable and accurate. Our reversal rate undermines this hallmark. These troubling issues in capital cases must be addressed now."
A study ordered by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court has found pay for court-appointed defense lawyers in death penalty cases in Philadelphia to be "grossly inadequate." The study, which was authored by Common Pleas Court Judge Benjamin Lerner, was initiated after defense lawyers petitioned the Court to increase the fees or halt death-penalty cases. The study noted there are fewer than 30 lawyers in Philadelphia willing to take capital-case appointments for indigent clients who meet the state qualifications. Philadelphia pays defense lawyers less than any other county in the state, giving lead counsel a flat fee of $2,000 to prepare a capital case, including the first half-day of trial. For the rest of a trial, a lawyer gets $200 for half days and $400 for full days. Judge Lerner said "The existing compensation system unacceptably increases the risk of ineffective assistance of counsel in individual cases and is primarily responsible for the First Judicial District's growing inability to attract a sufficient number of qualified attorneys willing to accept court appointments in capital cases." The study also noted that the lack of willing, qualified attorneys led to waits "that in too many cases, [have] delayed justice to the threshold of denial." The report recommended that Philadelphia spend an additional $340,000 on capital-case attorneys, on top of the $200,000 spent in 2010.