A request by the Illinois Attorney General's Office for an investigation into a lawyer's bills to a state death penalty defense fund is mired in concerns over conflicts of interest, and a lack of money.

The immediate issue involves the defense in the second trial of Cecil Sutherland, sent to death row in 2004 for the murder of a child near Mount Vernon 17 years before. His previous conviction was reversed over concerns about the quality of his defense.

The state's fund to ensure competent defense in capital cases paid $2 million for Sutherland's second defense, including $900,000 in legal fees to attorney John Paul Carroll. Critics said it was excessive.

A request for a formal investigation came after the Post-Dispatch reported last month that a judge in Kane County had appointed Carroll to defend a new death penalty defendant just one day after Carroll admitted making a serious legal error in another murder case.

Richard D. Schwind, chief of the attorney general's Criminal Enforcement Division, wrote a letter last week soliciting help with the investigation from Gary Duncan, the state's attorney of Jefferson County. That's where Sutherland's crime occurred.

Schwind wrote that his office has a conflict in doing its own investigation because it was involved in Sutherland's prosecution. The letter emphasized that, "It is critical that a prosecutorial agency conduct a thorough investigation" into the billings.

The letter asked that Duncan seek an investigation by the state Appellate Prosecutor's Office. A state's attorney is empowered to make such a request, but the attorney general is not.

Duncan said the Appellate Prosecutor's Office has a conflict too, as it also had been involved in Sutherland's case.

The other option would be for Duncan to appoint a special prosecutor - something he says is too costly for his county.

"It's so long ago now and it could be very expensive," Duncan said.

He worries that an investigation could be a "runaway train" involving other cases and agencies.

"Our county has extremely limited resources for something that could be very difficult to investigate and involve a lot more than just our local area," Duncan said.

He was referring to a Post-Dispatch investigation, published in September, that revealed endemic waste and lax oversight of the state's Capital Litigation Fund.

The newspaper found some people charging the fund as much as $300 an hour for merely driving to a trial, expense vouchers labeled only as "out-of-pocket expenses" and inconsistencies in the billing times for meetings. One private investigator was allowed to bill for his support staff's work at his own professional hourly rate.

"Obviously, there needs to be an investigation," Duncan said. "The question is who ought to do it."

The Attorney General's Office said the appellate prosecutor was involved only in Sutherland's first case - not the second where the questioned bills were submitted - making it the appropriate investigative arm.

"This is a paper case, not a cold case or a drain on anyone's resources," said Cara Smith, an aide to Attorney General Lisa Madigan. "We've asked for an outside investigation into this one specific case because we can't do it."

Smith said her office is examining investigative avenues for other complaints involving the death penalty fund.

Steven Beckett, professor and director of trial advocacy at the University of Illinois' law school, said it is normal and proper procedure for the attorney general to refer such a matter to the local state's attorney. But, he said, it's up to the state's attorney to act.

"It cries out for answers," said Beckett. "It would baffle me if they left it flat."

Nicholas J.C. Pistor is a staff writer with the St. Louis Post-Dispatch