A legal battle is unfolding in Florida, raising serious concerns about the right to counsel for death row inmates. The case of Anthony Wainwright, who is scheduled to be executed, has brought to light potential systemic failures in providing adequate legal representation. The core issue: whether a qualified, pro bono attorney can represent Wainwright when his current registry counsel is deemed ineffective.

The Wainwright Case: A Constitutional Crisis?

At the heart of the controversy is the Florida Supreme Court’s handling of Wainwright’s case. A retired lawyer from the Capital Habeas Unit (CHU), who previously represented Wainwright, offered to represent him in state court for free. Wainwright himself desired this representation. Though, the court initially rejected this, insisting that his registry lawyer, who reportedly hadn’t seen Wainwright in over a decade and refused to file an appeal, must sign off on any filings.

When the retired CHU lawyer filed a petition to stop Wainwright’s execution, the Florida Supreme Court responded by issuing an order stating that the document would be stricken unless the registry counsel signed on. The State then urged the Court to strike the pleading and close the case.

This situation has sparked outrage among abolitionists and legal experts, who argue that it jeopardizes Wainwright’s constitutional right to counsel. The implications could extend far beyond this single case.

A History of Legal Representation on Florida’s death Row

The struggle for adequate legal representation for death row inmates in Florida has a long and complex history. Initially, dedicated lawyers worked pro bono to defend those facing execution. Their success lead to the creation of state-run capital Collateral Regional Counsels (CCRCs) in the 1990s.

While the CCRCs ensured that everyone on death row had access to a lawyer, the system was not without its flaws. The head of the CCRCs was appointed by the Governor, injecting politics into the process. In 2003,then-Governor Jeb Bush sought to shut down the North CCRC and privatize the work,creating a registry of lawyers with minimal oversight.

This privatization effort was widely criticized. Then Supreme court Justice Raul Cantero publicly stated in 2005 that it was the worst lawyering I’ve ever seen. The experiment ultimately failed, and CCRC North reopened in 2013.

The establishment of federal Capital Habeas Units (CHUs) in 2015 provided additional qualified counsel, independent of political appointments. Ideally,the CCRCs would handle state court litigation,while the CHUs would handle federal court litigation.

The Core Issue: Right to Counsel

The central question is whether an inmate on death row has the right to choose a qualified attorney, especially when that attorney is willing to work pro bono and their representation would not cause any delay. Refusing such representation, critics argue, effectively nullifies the right to counsel.

As one advocate put it, If you are not allowed to counsel of your choice when there is 1) no cost to the State and 2) no delay in the process, then you do not have a right to counsel at all.

In Wainwright’s case, this means he could be stuck with what has been described as the worst lawyering by a retired Supreme Court Justice.

Call to Action

The situation demands immediate action. advocates are urging governor DeSantis to stay Wainwright’s execution. petitions are circulating, and a public event is scheduled to raise awareness.

• send Governor DeSantis a message NOW to urge him to stop Anthony’s execution.
• Sign and share Anthony’s petition.
• Sign the petition to stop the June 24th execution of Tommy Gudinas.

A public discussion on the death penalty, including the cases of Anthony Wainwright and Tommy Gudinas, will be held at Allendale United Methodist Church (3803 Haines Rd N, St. Petersburg, FL 33703). The event will be livestreamed.