Nolan O’Neal was 20 when Chester police arrested him in a 2002 murder case. Four eyewitnesses identified him before trial, but all four later recanted, saying police had pressured them to accuse him. O’Neal was convicted in 2005 and has continued to maintain his innocence. In 2013, attorney Scott Galloway was appointed to help O’Neal seek relief under Pennsylvania’s Post Conviction Relief Act, which allows people to challenge convictions based on certain new evidence or problems with their legal representation. Over the next nine years, Galloway received 41 extensions from a Delaware County judge. In 2022, Galloway filed a two-page petition addressing one of the claims O’Neal wanted raised. The filing included a signed statement from the murder victim’s brother, who had written that his testimony against O’Neal was false and that he wanted to correct it. The petition did not address other issues O’Neal had raised, and the judge began proceedings to dismiss the claim, in part because it had been filed too late. O’Neal is now pursuing the case with a new court-appointed lawyer. O’Neal wrote Galloway dozens of letters from prison, suggesting legal arguments and people to contact. He said navigating the process was exhausting, and that people seeking relief can end up struggling to get heard by the lawyers appointed to represent them. A review of court records across Pennsylvania found that at least 250 people have spent five years or longer waiting for their post-conviction lawyers to act. In nearly 200 cases over the past 15 years, attorneys were appointed but filed nothing for at least a year before being replaced. The review also found that hundreds of people waited two years or more before receiving letters asking judges to withdraw from their cases because their claims lacked merit. Pennsylvania promises people challenging their convictions the right to effective legal representation, regardless of their ability to pay. But the state has no general deadline for appointed post-conviction lawyers to complete their work, and judges have often granted repeated extensions without setting firm schedules. Prisoners, by contrast, generally must prepare an initial petition themselves and meet a one-year filing deadline. The system also lacks statewide requirements for lawyers’ training, experience or caseloads. Most post-conviction cases are handled by private attorneys, often with little supervision. Counties set their own pay arrangements; some pay flat fees as low as $500 per case, while others use annual contracts that do not limit the number of cases assigned. The state began contributing money to indigent defense in 2023, but its contribution remains 57 cents per resident, compared with an average of $26 per resident in neighboring states, according to the review. Counties provide the rest of the funding as they choose. The American Civil Liberties Union has a pending lawsuit alleging that Pennsylvania’s system has led to widespread violations of the right to counsel. Lawyers and advocates say the combination of low pay, heavy workloads and minimal oversight can leave cases stalled or encourage attorneys to move quickly to withdraw. In Delaware County, Galloway handled roughly 20 to 30 post-conviction cases a year while also running a private practice and, for a time, holding local elected office. He declined to discuss O’Neal’s case, citing confidentiality obligations. Judge George A. Pagano, who granted the extensions, also declined to comment. Pennsylvania’s practices contrast with systems in some other states, where appellate lawyers must meet specific qualifications or complete training before receiving appointments. A state court committee has proposed minimum standards for indigent-defense lawyers, though its recommendations say relevant experience should be required only when practicable. For O’Neal, the consequences of delay are personal: he remains incarcerated while pursuing claims that began more than two decades ago. His case shows how a promise of legal help can mean little in practice when there are no enforceable deadlines or consistent safeguards for the people waiting behind bars.