The American Bar Association created the Death Penalty Representation Project in 1986. Our goals are to raise awareness about the lack of representation available to death row inmates, to address this urgent need by recruiting competent volunteer attorneys and to offer these volunteers training and assistance. We also work for systemic changes in the criminal justice system that would assure those facing death are represented at all stages of the proceedings from trial through clemency by qualified, adequately compensated counsel.

Bobby v. Van Hook

On October 9, 2009, the US Supreme Court issued a per curiam opinion in Bobby v. Van Hook that discussed the 6th Circuit's use of the 2003 ABA Guidelines. Click here to read an analysis of this case and its implications.

	Each year the Project celebrates its dedicated volunteers at our Anniversary & Volunteer Recognition Event. Pro bono firms are nominated by their colleagues for exceptional service to prisoners on Death Row and honored with our award. Visit our Event page to learn more and RSVP. We hope to see you in Atlanta!
Congratulations to our 2009 Award Recipients Dykema Gossett PLLC and Goodwin Procter LLP!

NEW! Click here to learn about a special offer from the Atlanta Symphony for Event attendees!

Project Special Event - July 16, 2009, Boston, Massachusetts

On July 16, 2009, the Project will hold a special two-part event. Attendees will learn how they can represent a death-sentenced prisoner and manage the costs of representation in today’s uncertain economy. US District Court Judge Nancy Gertner will host our event at the John Joseph Moakley US Courthouse in Boston with co-sponsorship by the Boston and Massachusetts Bar Associations.

Click here to visit our event page, get additional information, and let us know whether you will be able to attend!

The Future of the Death Penalty in the United States Supreme Court - July 31, 2009, Chicago, Illinois

On July 31, 2009, the Project along with co-sponsor the Chicago Bar Association will hold a program at the ABA Annual Meeting in Chicago, Illinois. Join us in Chicago for a discussion of recent death penalty cases at the US Supreme Court and how domestic and international law, popular opinion, exonerations and the changing composition of the court will affect how future death penalty cases are decided.

Click here to visit our event page, get additional information, and let us know whether you will be able to attend!

Sonnenschein Nath & Rosenthal Victory in Alabama

On April 21, 2009, the United States District Court of the Northeastern Division of the Northern District of Alabama ordered that the sentence of death upon petitioner Kenneth Glenn Thomas be vacated. In a 126 page court opinion deciding that Mr. Thomas was mentally retarded, it was further ordered that the Circuit Court of Limestone County, Alabama resentence him to a term of life imprisonment without the possibility of parole.

Judge Lynwood Smith’s opinion presents a comprehensive discussion of mental retardation, including the Flynn effect, which requires that an IQ score be reduced by 0.3 points for each year following the publication of the test. Jerome T. Wolf, Barrett Vahle and their team of volunteer lawyers at Sonnenschein Nath & Rosenthal are commended for their outstanding work on behalf of Mr. Thomas!

King & Spalding Achieves 4th Circuit Victory

On May 11, 2009 in a unanimous opinion, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit remanded Justin Wolfe's habeas case for a determination of his Schlup claim of actual innocence and, if he satisfies that threshold, a merits determination of his defaulted claims on the merits. The appeals court's ruling orders the U.S. District Court to determine whether Wolfe is entitled to an evidentiary hearing.

Judge Robert King wrote that the recantation by the prosecution's main witness strongly suggests that an evidentiary hearing may be warranted, and that “If the district court determines that the case does not preclude an evidentiary hearing, the court must reexamine whether Wolfe has shown that he is entitled to one. If such a hearing is warranted, the court should resolve any factual disputes bearing on the procedural Schlup issue and the substantive Brady and Giglio claims.”

With the assistance of Michele J. Brace at the Virginia Capital Resource Center, a team of volunteer attorneys at King & Spalding LLP represented Mr. Wolfe at his direct appeal in 2003 before the US District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia in Norfolk. Congratulations to our volunteers, led by Daniel J. King and Jane C. Luxton, formerly of King & Spalding LLP, for their work on Mr. Wolfe’s case! .

Presentation to Section of Litigation Leadership