Saving the Life of a Capital Defendant

In August 2024, the firm’s 15-year representation of Cory Maples — an inmate sentenced to death in 1997 — ended, successfully, when a judge sentenced Mr. Maples to life without parole.

This tremendous outcome was the result of the hard work and dedication of a huge team across our Washington, D.C., New York, Boston, and Chicago offices, including associates, summer associates, and paralegals, led over the years by partners Elana Nightingale Dawson, Greg Garre, and Jonathan Su.

A Troubled History

In 1997, a jury in Alabama convicted Mr. Maples of murder and he was sentenced to death. During that trial, Mr. Maples was represented by counsel who had never handled a capital penalty-phase proceeding, conducted almost no investigation into Mr. Maples’ life, and presented the barest of cases to the jury for why his life should be spared.

Later, with the help of different lawyers, Mr. Maples filed a state post-conviction petition to challenge his conviction and sentence — arguing that his trial counsel had been ineffective at the penalty phase, thereby violating his constitutional rights. However, the lawyers handling his case subsequently left their firm without notifying the state appellate court. The notice of the denial of his state petition sent to his lawyers was returned to the state clerk’s office stamped, “return to sender—left firm.” As a result, Mr. Maples did not learn that the court had ruled against him, rejecting his claim for post-conviction relief for ineffective assistance of counsel until after the deadline to appeal the decision had passed.

Arguing at the Highest Levels for Effective Representation

Latham took over as counsel for Mr. Maples. After securing US Supreme Court review of his case in 2011, Latham successfully persuaded the Court that Mr. Maples should not be penalized for his previous lawyers’ failures. Writing for a 7-2 majority, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg concluded that, “[i]n these circumstances, no just system would lay the default at Maples’ death-cell door.” The Court ruled that Mr. Maples deserved an opportunity to press forward with his habeas petition.

Following that decision, and a subsequent appeal to the US Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit in which Latham prevailed again on behalf of Mr. Maples again, our team was tasked with presenting evidence to the federal district court that the original jury should have heard at Mr. Maples’ trial in 1997. This was an extensive effort, revisiting events that took place decades before. The evidence was necessary to prove Mr. Maples’ claim that, had he received effective counsel, the sentencing jury would have heard compelling mitigating evidence that could potentially have changed the death sentence recommendation.

After considering the evidence presented at the five-day evidentiary hearing, during which the Latham team offered more than 20 witnesses, then-Chief Judge Karon Bowdre for US District Court for the Northern District of Alabama ruled in Mr. Maples’ favor. At the conclusion of the hearing, Chief Judge Bowdre made extensive remarks, stating this was one of the most difficult cases she had presided over in her 18 years on the federal bench. In January 2022, the judge ruled that Mr. Maples had been denied effective assistance of counsel at the penalty phase of his 1997 trial and granted his petition for a writ for habeas corpus, ordering the state to either subject Mr. Maples to a life sentence or have a sentencing retrial. The state of Alabama chose to retry Mr. Maples.

Building the Capital Defense

For the next two-and-a-half years, Latham built and worked alongside a team that included experts in capital representation from around the US to prepare for Mr. Maples’ retrial. Together, we identified and prepared fact witnesses, many of whom testified during the federal habeas proceeding; identified and worked with expert witnesses, to complement the fact witnesses; briefed motions to make a record and preserve myriad issues for appeal; selected a jury using the Colorado method of capital jury selection; drafted jury instructions; and generally strategized about how best to obtain a life verdict.

Mr. Maples’ case included 23 witnesses who testified before the jury — among them four expert witnesses who told the story of a man abandoned at childhood by several family members, and saw and suffered physical abuse and neglect throughout his childhood. Those witnesses testified that this abuse, abandonment, and neglect, coupled with his family’s history of addiction, primed Mr. Maples to abuse drugs and alcohol. Although he sought help for his substance abuse, few options existed in the early 1990s for those suffering from addiction who lacked financial resources.

In addition to details of Mr. Maples’ life leading up to the crime, the jury heard about his exceptional prison record — reflecting zero incidence of physical violence across the approximately 30 years he has spent in prison. Eventually the jury returned with a 9-3 vote for life without the possibility of parole — almost the exact opposite of the jury vote Mr. Maples received in 1997.

The 9-3 vote, however, was not the end. Until 2017, Alabama juries returned “advisory verdicts,” which the judge was required to consider but could decide not to follow. Despite the Alabama legislature replacing that law with a more traditional jury-sentencing scheme, the judge in Mr. Maples’ case concluded that the old law applied because Mr. Maples was charged before the law changed. The judge therefore set a sentencing hearing in August 2024, at which both the state and defense could offer additional evidence to try to convince the judge to vote their way.

For the next two-and-a-half months, Latham again worked with lead counsel to prepare for the sentencing — identifying potential witnesses, preparing briefs and a sentencing memorandum, and strategizing on how to convince the judge to preserve the jury verdict.

During the sentencing hearing, the state presented four new witnesses, and Latham called two witnesses in response. After both sides closed, Mr. Maples allocuted, apologizing to the family one of the victims who were at the hearing. The judge then sentenced our client to life without the possibility of parole.

After 15 years and the possibility of execution if the Supreme Court declined to hear his case, Latham succeeded in overturning Mr. Maples’ death sentence and saving his life.