The article takes issue with several claims in an earlier article on capital punishment: (1) Because reliability is more important in capital punishment cases, more protections are needed, so there are more ways capital verdicts can go seriously wrong, so there is less need to worry about the process. Response: The frequency with which capital verdicts fail is a reason to be concerned, not sanguine. (2) The law governing ineffective counsel is more hospitable to claims aimed at the penalty phase of capital trials. Response: The earlier writers offer no evidence for this claim and it is demonstrably false. (3) Overturning a capital sentencing trial, as opposed to the guilt trial, is a relatively low-cost reversal. Response: It gives appellate courts a compromise outcome not available in non-capital cases and decreases the amount of "conviction" relief. (4) High error rates in death cases are the result of capital defendants' greater opportunity to appeal and to more intense review. Response: The review process is the same in non-capital cases and capital prisoners may file more appeals because there is more error affecting their verdicts, not the reverse. Notes