The Case Of Cory Maples

In the case Maples v. Thomas in 2012, Cory Maples was found guilty of murder and sentenced to death in Alabama. In 2001, he sought post-conviction relief in court. He said that his attorneys failed to give him proper representation that is guaranteed by the 6th Amendment. The 6th Amendment states, “Sixth Amendment guarantees the rights of criminal defendants, including the right to a public trial without unnecessary delay, the right to a lawyer, the right to an impartial jury, and the right to know who your accusers are and the nature of the charges and evidence against you.” Maples felt as if his attorneys were not helping him in his trial.

Two pro bono attorneys that were associated with the New York offices of Sullivan and Cromwell, Munanka and Ingen- Housz wrote his Maples petition. In 2002, while Maples’ petition was pending in court, Munanka and Ingen- Housz left Sullivan and Cromwell and they were disabled from representing Maples. Neither of the two attorneys told Maples they were leaving and they never sought the courts leave to withdraw. So they were still considered Maples legal representation in the courts eyes. When the two pro- bono attorneys left there were no

The court then sent notices to Munanka and Ingen-Housz at the Sullivan and Cromwell address, but the notices were returned unopened. The 42-day period that Maples had to file a notice of appeal ran out. When an Alabama Attorney General sent a letter to Maples telling him that he had four weeks to file a federal habeas petition, Maples then called his mother. His mother then called Sullivan and Cromwell and three new attorneys moved the trial court to reissue its order and start over the 42-day appeal period. The court denied the request. The Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals denied the petition for mandamus, and the Alabama Supreme Court affirmed. Maples then sought federal habeas relief, but the District Court and the Eleventh Circuit denied his