In the case of Michael Bowersox, Superintendent, Potosi Correctional Center v. Doyle J. Williams (1995), the U.S Supreme Court ruled in favor of Bowersox and reversed a stay of execution granted to Williams by a lower court. The issue at hand was whether or not it was constitutional for Missouri to execute an inmate who had been denied access to his attorney during crucial periods after his conviction due to state-imposed limitations on attorney-client contact hours. The Supreme Court held that since there were no federal constitutional requirements mandating unlimited post-conviction access between death row inmates and their attorneys, Missouri's restrictions did not violate William's rights under the Sixth Amendment right-to-counsel clause nor Eighth Amendment’s prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment.

In the dissenting opinion for Bowersox v. Williams, Justice Stevens argued that the majority's decision to deny Doyle J. Williams a stay of execution was unjust and violated his constitutional rights. He contended that it is unconstitutional to execute someone who has not been provided with adequate legal representation, as guaranteed by the Sixth Amendment right to counsel clause. In this case, he believed that Mr. Williams' lawyers had failed him during both his trial and appeal processes due to their lack of experience in capital cases and failure to present mitigating evidence which could have potentially spared him from death row. Furthermore, Justice Stevens criticized the Court’s rush towards judgment without fully considering all aspects of William's claims about ineffective assistance of counsel at sentencing phase.