The U.S. Supreme Court case of Frank B. McFarland v. Wayne Scott, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Institutional Division in 1993 revolved around the issue of whether a death row inmate has a constitutional right to legal counsel during habeas corpus proceedings. McFarland was sentenced to death in Texas and sought federal habeas relief without an attorney's assistance because his execution date had not yet been set; thus he did not qualify for state-provided counsel under existing law at that time. The District Court denied his request for stay of execution so he could obtain representation and the Fifth Circuit affirmed this decision. However, when appealed to the Supreme Court it held that a capital defendant has the right to legal representation during post-conviction proceedings under Title 21 U.S.C Section 848(q)(4)(B), even before formal filing for such relief or setting an execution date occurs - effectively overruling lower courts' decisions. This ruling emphasized on ensuring fair access to justice by recognizing inmates' rights to have adequate legal support while challenging their convictions or sentences through habeas corpus petitions.

In the dissenting opinion for McFarland v. Scott, Justice Scalia argued that a stay of execution is not necessary to protect a defendant's right to counsel in habeas corpus proceedings. He believed that the majority misinterpreted 21 U.S.C §848(q)(4)(B), which provides indigent capital defendants with federally funded legal assistance during federal habeas corpus proceedings, by extending it to include pre-application stages such as preparing and filing an application for writ of habeas corpus. According to Scalia, this interpretation was inconsistent with historical practices and other statutory provisions related to post-conviction relief. Furthermore, he contended that there were no constitutional grounds requiring states or courts to delay executions until after all potential claims have been fully litigated in federal court because the Constitution does not guarantee inmates unlimited opportunities for appeal or collateral attack on their convictions and sentences.