O'Melveny's 2018-2019 Pro Bono Review

O’MELVENY PRO BONO PROGRAM REVIEW 2018- 2019 5 Ensuring Capital Defendants’ Access to Investigative Resources On March 21, the US Supreme Court handed down a unanimous decision in favor of O’Melveny client Carlos Manuel Ayestas, vacating a ruling that had deprived him of investigative resources to support his representation in federal habeas proceedings. In an opinion by Justice Samuel Alito, the Court adopted in full the statutory interpretation proposed by O’Melveny, and rejected the lower court’s denial of funding: “[I]n those cases in which funding stands a credible chance of enabling a habeas petitioner to overcome the obstacle of procedural default, it may be error for a district court to refuse funding.” Congress has authorized federal courts to pay for “investigative, expert, or other services” if the services are “reasonably necessary” in capital cases for indigent defendants. The question in this case was whether someone seeking such funding after being convicted must show a “substantial need” for the services, as held by the Fifth Circuit. The Supreme Court rejected the Fifth Circuit’s “substantial need” test, concluding that it was a more demanding standard than the one contemplated in the statute. The Court instead adopted O’Melveny’s argument that the proper standard is whether a reasonable attorney would regard the services as sufficiently important. The Court explained that a defendant seeking funds is not expected to prove that the resources will necessarily allow him to succeed, but rather that they are “reasonably necessary.” The Court also rejected the argument that it lacked jurisdiction to correct the Fifth Circuit’s erroneous reading of the statute that the denial of Mr. Ayestas’s funding request was an “administrative” decision. The Court held that the funding decision was clearly reviewable The US Supreme Court O’Melveny has one of the leading appellate practices in the country. We proudly draw on those capabilities to serve the public good and assist those in need. Our lawyers argue before the US Supreme Court, various courts of appeals, and the highest state courts in cases with ramifications that reach far beyond a single courtroom. CLIENT SUCCESSES Over the past two years, O’Melveny lawyers devoted 139,540 hours to pro bono matters, representing 6.6% of the firm’s total work output.