By PAUL NOWELL, Associated Press Writer

- A lawyer who admitted sabotaging the appeal of a condemned man should be disbarred, the leader of an anti-death penalty group said Friday.

Attorney David B. Smith said he let his co-counsel miss a key deadline for filing one of Russell Tucker's appeals in state Supreme Court. Tucker, 34, is scheduled to die Dec. 7 for the 1994 murder of a security guard.

``I decided that Mr. Tucker deserved to die, and I would not do anything to prevent his execution,'' Smith said in an affidavit filed Oct. 24. He said he was suffering from depression.

Asked Thursday to explain his actions, Smith said only that he spoke up because ``I had to tell the truth, and that's not always an easy thing to do.''

Smith's co-counsel Steven Allen asked a Superior Court judge on Wednesday to allow the appeal to be heard and to appoint new lawyers for Tucker. The judge said both questions are up to the Supreme Court, and Allen is preparing to file an appeal there.

Stephen Dear, executive director of People of Faith Against the Death Penalty, called for Smith's disbarment.

``I don't see how he could continue to be allowed to practice law when a man's life was at stake,'' Dear said. ``He clearly violated the basic ethics of his profession.''

Carolin Bakewell, a spokeswoman for the North Carolina State Bar, would not say whether Smith is the subject of a disciplinary investigation.

Smith said disbarment is ``a distinct possibility.''

``I've thought about it, but I knew the truth had to be told,'' he said.

Dear said the case should boost a push to halt executions in North Carolina while the death penalty is studied. His group has collected 7,000 signatures on petitions and more than 100 resolutions from local governments and groups.

Prosecutors have said they will not oppose postponing Tucker's execution, which is likely to be delayed anyway because federal courts have yet to hear the case.

In his affidavit, Smith said he began to suffer from depression and insomnia after he was assigned to represent Tucker in his appeals in 1998.

Smith said he met with the defendant in prison and decided he didn't like him. Then he read the transcripts from the trial and concluded, ``Mr. Tucker should be executed for his crimes.''

With a deadline approaching for filing an appeal with the state's highest court, Smith avoided working with Allen on the case. He said he knew Allen had misunderstood the deadline, and pointedly didn't correct him.

``I was passively sabotaging Mr. Tucker's postconviction recourse,'' the affidavit said.

Tucker's execution date was set after the defense missed the deadline. Just over a week later, Smith admitted what he had done.

Allen defended Smith's behavior as uncharacteristic.

``He was sick at the time he was asked to accept this representation,'' Allen said. ``Mr. Smith is a very fine lawyer who was working under very difficult circumstances.''