[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3035 Introduced in House (IH)]
109th CONGRESS
1st Session
H. R. 3035
To establish streamlined procedures for collateral review of mixed
petitions, amendments, and defaulted claims, and for other purposes.
_______________________________________________________________________
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
June 22, 2005
Mr. Daniel E. Lungren of California introduced the following bill;
which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary
_______________________________________________________________________
A BILL
To establish streamlined procedures for collateral review of mixed
petitions, amendments, and defaulted claims, and for other purposes.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the
United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS.
(a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``Streamlined
Procedures Act of 2005''.
(b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents for this Act is as
follows:
Sec. 1. Short Title; table of contents.
Sec. 2. Mixed petitions.
Sec. 3. Amendments to petitions.
Sec. 4. Procedurally defaulted claims.
Sec. 5. Tolling of limitation period.
Sec. 6. Harmless error in sentencing.
Sec. 7. Unified review standard.
Sec. 8. Appeals.
Sec. 9. Capital cases.
Sec. 10. Clemency and pardon decisions.
Sec. 11. Ex parte funding requests.
Sec. 12. Crime victims' rights.
Sec. 13. Technical corrections.
Sec. 14. Application to pending cases.
SEC. 2. MIXED PETITIONS.
Section 2254(b) of title 28, United States Code, is amended--
(1) in paragraph (1), by striking subparagraphs (A) and (B)
and inserting the following:
``(A) the applicant--
``(i) has exhausted the remedies available in the
courts of the State by fairly presenting and arguing
the specific Federal basis for each claim in the State
courts; and
``(ii) has described in the application how the
applicant has exhausted each claim in the State courts;
or
``(B)(i) each unexhausted claim for relief in the
application would qualify for consideration on the grounds
described in subsection (e)(2); and
``(ii) the denial of such relief is contrary to, or would
entail an unreasonable application of, clearly established
Federal law, as determined by the Supreme Court of the United
States.''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following:
``(4) Any unexhausted claim that does not qualify for consideration
on the grounds described in this subsection shall be dismissed with
prejudice.''.
SEC. 3. AMENDMENTS TO PETITIONS.
(a) In General.--Section 2244 of title 28, United States Code, is
amended by adding at the end the following:
``(e)(1) An application for a writ of habeas corpus may be amended
once as a matter of course before the earlier of the date on which an
answer to the application is filed or the expiration of the 1-year
period described in subsection (d).
``(2) Except as provided under paragraph (1), an application may
not be amended to modify existing claims or to present additional
claims, unless the modified or newly presented claims would qualify for
consideration on the grounds described in subsection (b)(2).''.
(b) Conforming Amendment.--Section 2242 of title 28, United States
Code, is amended in the third undesignated paragraph by striking ``in
the rules of procedure applicable to civil actions'' and inserting
``under section 2244(e)''.
SEC. 4. PROCEDURALLY DEFAULTED CLAIMS.
(a) In General.--Section 2254 of title 28, United States Code, is
amended--
(1) by redesignating subsections (h) and (i) as subsections
(i) and (j), respectively; and
(2) by adding after subsection (g) the following:
``(h)(1) A court, justice, or judge shall not have jurisdiction to
consider an application for a writ of habeas corpus on behalf of a
person in custody pursuant to the judgment of a State court with
respect to any claim that was found by the State court to be
procedurally barred, or any claim of ineffective assistance of counsel
related to such claim, unless--
``(A) the claim would qualify for consideration on the
grounds described in subsection (e)(2); or
``(B) the State, through counsel, expressly waives the
provisions of this paragraph.
``(2)(A) A court, justice, or judge shall not have jurisdiction to
consider any claim that the State court denies on the merits and on the
ground that the claim was not properly raised under State procedural
law, or any claim of ineffective assistance of counsel related to such
claim, unless the claim would qualify for consideration on the grounds
described in subsection (e)(2).
``(B) A court, justice, or judge shall not have jurisdiction to
consider any claim that is otherwise subject to paragraph (1) and that
was reviewed by the State court for plain error, fundamental error, or
under a similarly heightened standard of review, unless the claim would
qualify for consideration on the grounds described in subsection
(e)(2).
``(3) The State shall not be required to answer any claim described
in paragraph (1) or (2) unless the court first determines that the
claim would qualify for consideration on the grounds described in
subsection (e)(2).
``(4) If a court determines that a State court order denying relief
on procedural grounds is ambiguous as to which claims were found to be
procedurally barred, the court shall resolve any perceived ambiguity,
if necessary, by examining the full record in the State court.
``(5) An application for a writ of habeas corpus on behalf of a
person in custody pursuant to the judgment of a State court shall not
be granted with respect to any claim under paragraph (1) or (2) unless
the denial of such relief is contrary to, or would entail an
unreasonable application of, clearly established Federal law, as
determined by the Supreme Court of the United States.''.
(b) Limitation.--Section 2244(d)(2) of title 28, United States
Code, as amended by section 3, is amended by adding at the end the
following: ``An application that was otherwise improperly filed in
State court shall not be deemed to have been properly filed because the
State court exercises discretion in applying a rule or recognizes
exceptions to that rule.''.
SEC. 5. TOLLING OF LIMITATION PERIOD.
Section 2244(d) of title 28, United States Code, is amended--
(1) in paragraph (2), by striking ``judgment or''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following:
``(3) In this section, an application for State post-conviction or
other collateral review--
``(A) is pending from the date on which the application is
filed with a State court until the date on which the same State
court rules on that application; and
``(B) is not pending during any period of time between the
date on which a State court rules on that application and the
date on which the application or a related application is
filed, or is otherwise presented, for adjudication to such
State court on rehearing authorized by State law or to a higher
State court.
``(4) The period of limitation under paragraph (1) may be tolled,
suspended, or extended only as provided under this subsection.''.
SEC. 6. HARMLESS ERROR IN SENTENCING.
Section 2254 of title 28, United States Code, as amended by section
4, is amended by adding at the end the following:
``(k) A court, justice, or judge shall not have jurisdiction to
consider an application with respect to an error relating to the
applicant's sentence or sentencing that has been found to be harmless
or not prejudicial in State court proceedings, unless a determination
that the error is not structural is contrary to clearly established
Federal law, as determined by the Supreme Court of the United
States.''.
SEC. 7. UNIFIED REVIEW STANDARD.
Section 107(c) of the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act
of 1996 (28 U.S.C. 2261 note) is amended by striking ``Chapter 154 of
title 28, United States Code (as amended by subsection (a))'' and
inserting ``This title and the amendments made by this title''.
SEC. 8. APPEALS.
(a) Appellate Time Limits.--Section 2254 of title 28, United States
Code, as amended by sections 4 and 6, is further amended by adding at
the end the following:
``(l) In review by a court of appeals of a district court's
determination of an application for a writ of habeas corpus on behalf
of a person in custody pursuant to the judgment of a State court, the
following shall apply:
``(1) A timely filed notice of appeal from an order issuing
a writ of habeas corpus shall operate as a stay of that order,
pending final disposition of the appeal.
``(2) A court of appeals shall decide the appeal from an
order granting or denying a writ of habeas corpus--
``(A) not later than 300 days after the date on
which the brief of the appellee is filed or, if no
timely brief is filed, the date on which such brief is
due; or
``(B) if a cross-appeal is filed, not later than
300 days after the date on which the appellant files a
brief in response to the issues presented by the cross-
appeal or, if no timely brief is filed, the date on
which such brief is due.
``(3)(A) If a petition is filed for a panel rehearing or
rehearing by the court of appeals en banc following a decision
by a panel of a court of appeals under paragraph (2), the court
of appeals shall decide whether to grant the petition not later
than 90 days after the date on which the petition is filed,
unless a response is required.
``(B) If a response to a petition is required under
subparagraph (A), a court of appeals shall decide whether to
grant the petition not later than 90 days after the date on
which the response is filed or, if no timely response is filed,
the date on which the response is due.
``(C) If a panel rehearing is granted, the panel shall make
a determination of the appeal on rehearing not later than 120
days after the date on which the order granting a panel
rehearing is entered. No second or successive petition for
panel rehearing shall be allowed.
``(D) If rehearing en banc is granted, the court of appeals
shall make a final determination of the appeal not later than
180 days after the date on which the order granting rehearing
en banc is entered.
``(4) If a court of appeals fails to comply with the
requirements of this subsection, the State may petition the
Supreme Court, or a justice thereof, for a writ of mandamus to
enforce the requirements of this subsection.
``(5) The time limitations in this subsection shall apply
in all proceedings in a court of appeals on review of a
district court's determination of an application for a writ of
habeas corpus, including any such proceedings in a court of
appeals following a remand by the Supreme Court for further
proceedings.
``(6) In proceedings following remand in a court of
appeals, the time limit specified in paragraph (2) shall begin
on the date the remand is ordered if further briefing is not
required in the court of appeals. If there is further briefing
in the court of appeals, the time limit specified in paragraph
(2) shall begin on the date on which a responsive brief is
filed or, if no timely responsive brief is filed, from the date
on which such brief is due.
``(7) The failure of a court to meet or comply with a time
limitation under this subsection shall not be a ground for
granting relief from a judgment of conviction or sentence, nor
shall the time limitations under this subsection be construed
to entitle a capital applicant to a stay of execution, to which
the applicant would otherwise not be entitled, for the purpose
of litigating any application or appeal.''.
(b) Finality of Determination.--Section 2244(b)(3)(E) of title 28,
United States Code, is amended by striking ``the subject of a
petition'' and all that follows and inserting the following: ``reheard
in the court of appeals or reviewed by writ of certiorari.''.
SEC. 9. CAPITAL CASES.
(a) Scope of Review.--Chapter 154 of title 28, United States Code,
is amended by striking section 2264 and inserting the following:
``Sec. 2264. Scope of Federal review
``(a) In General.--Except as provided in subsection (b), a court,
justice, or judge shall not have jurisdiction to consider any claim
relating to the judgment or sentence in an application covered under
this chapter.
``(b) Exception.--A court, justice, or judge has jurisdiction to
consider a claim under this chapter if the claim would qualify for
consideration on the grounds described in section 2254(e)(2). An
application shall not be granted with respect to any such claim unless
the denial of relief is contrary to, or would entail an unreasonable
application of, clearly established Federal law, as determined by the
Supreme Court of the United States.''.
(b) Time Limits.--Section 2266(b)(1)(A) of title 28, United States
Code, is amended by striking ``180 days after the date on which the
application is filed'' and inserting ``450 days after the date on which
the application is filed, or 60 days after the date on which the case
is submitted for decision, whichever is earlier''.
(c) Review by Attorney General.--
(1) In general.--Section 2261(b) of title 28, United States
Code, is amended--
(A) by striking ``(b) This chapter is applicable if
a State establishes'' and inserting the following:
``(b) This chapter is applicable if--
``(1) the Attorney General of the United States certifies
that a State has established'';
(B) in the first sentence, by striking the period
at the end and inserting a semicolon;
(C) by striking ``The rule of court or statute must
provide standards'' and inserting the following:
``(2) the court, statute, or other agency provides
standards'';
(D) by striking the period at the end and inserting
``; and''; and
(E) by adding at the end the following:
``(3) the order required under subsection (c) is entered on
or after the effective date of the Attorney General's
certification under section 2267.''.
(2) Technical and conforming amendments.--Section 2265(a)
of title 28, United States Code, is amended--
(A) by striking ``(a) For purposes'' and inserting
the following:
``(a)(1) For purposes'';
(B) by striking ``This chapter shall apply, as
provided in this section, in relation to a State
unitary review procedure if the State establishes'' and
inserting the following:
``(2) This chapter shall apply, as provided in this section, in
relation to a State unitary review procedure if--
``(A) the Attorney General of the United States certifies
that a State has established'';
(C) by striking ``or by statute'' and inserting ``,
by statute, or by agency rule'';
(D) by striking the period after ``proceedings''
and inserting a semicolon;
(E) by striking ``The rule of court or statute must
provide'' and inserting the following:
``(B) the rule of the court, the statute, or the agency
rule provides'';
(F) by striking the period at the end and inserting
``; and''; and
(G) by adding at the end the following:
``(C) the order required under subsection (b) is entered on
or after the effective date of the Attorney General's
certification under section 2267.''.
(d) Judicial Review.--Chapter 154 of title 28, United States Code,
is amended by adding at the end the following:
``Sec. 2267. Judicial review
``(a) In General.--If requested by the chief law enforcement
officer of a State, the Attorney General of the United States shall
determine whether the State has established a qualifying mechanism for
the purpose of section 2261(b)(3) or 2265(a)(2)(C), and, if so, the
date on which the mechanism was established. The date the mechanism was
established shall be the effective date of the certification.
``(b) Regulations.--The Attorney General shall promulgate
regulations to implement the certification procedure under subsection
(a).
``(c) Review of Certification.--
``(1) In general.--The Attorney General's determination of
whether to certify a State under this section is subject to
review exclusively as provided under chapter 158.
``(2) Venue.--The Court of Appeals for the District of
Columbia Circuit shall have exclusive jurisdiction over matters
under paragraph (1), subject to review by the Supreme Court
under section 2350.
``(3) Standard of review.--The Attorney General's
determination of whether to certify a State under this section
shall be conclusive unless manifestly contrary to the law and
an abuse of discretion.''.
(e) Clerical Amendments.--The table of sections for chapter 154 of
title 28, United States Code, is amended--
(1) by striking the item related to section 2264 and
inserting the following:
``2264. Scope of Federal review.'';
and
(2) by adding at the end the following:
``2267. Judicial review.''.
SEC. 10. CLEMENCY AND PARDON DECISIONS.
(a) In General.--Chapter 85 of title 28, United States Code, is
amended by adding at the end the following:
``Sec. 1370. State clemency and pardon decisions
``(a) In General.--Except as provided under subsection (b), and
notwithstanding any other provision of law, no Federal court shall have
jurisdiction to hear any cause or claim arising from the exercise of a
State's executive clemency or pardon power, or the process or
procedures used under such power.
``(b) Exception.--This section does not affect the jurisdiction of
the Supreme Court to review any decision of the highest court of a
State that involves a cause or claim arising from the exercise of a
State's executive clemency or pardon power, or the process or
procedures used under such power.''.
(b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections for chapter 85 of
title 28, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the
following:
``1370. State clemency and pardon decisions.''.
SEC. 11. EX PARTE FUNDING REQUESTS.
Section 408(q)(9) of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C.
848(q)(9)) is amended--
(1) by striking ``(9) Upon'' and inserting the following:
``(9) (A) Upon'';
(2) by striking the last two sentences and inserting the
following: ``An application for services under this paragraph
shall be decided by a judge other than the judge presiding over
the post conviction proceeding under section 2254 or 2255 of
title 28, United States Code, seeking to vacate or set aside a
death sentence. Any amounts authorized to be paid under this
paragraph shall be disclosed to the public immediately.''; and
(3) by adding at the end the following:
``(B) No ex parte proceeding, communication, or request may
be considered in a post-conviction action pursuant to this
section, except to the extent necessary to protect any
confidential-communications privilege between the defendant and
post-conviction counsel. The court shall not grant an
application for an ex parte proceeding, communication, or
request unless the application has been served upon the
respondent and the court has allowed the respondent a
reasonable opportunity to answer the application. All
proceedings, communications, or requests conducted pursuant to
this section shall be transcribed and made a part of the record
available for appellate review.''.
SEC. 12. CRIME VICTIMS' RIGHTS.
Section 3771(b) of title 18, United States Code, is amended by
adding at the end the following: ``A crime victim shall also be
afforded the rights established for crime victims by this section in a
Federal habeas corpus proceeding arising out of a State conviction.''.
SEC. 13. TECHNICAL CORRECTIONS.
(a) Appeal.--Section 2253(c)(1) of title 28, United States Code, is
amended by striking ``circuit justice or judge'' and inserting
``district or circuit judge''.
(b) Federal Custody.--Section 2255 of title 28, United States Code,
is amended by designating the 8 undesignated paragraphs as subsections
(a) through (h), respectively.
SEC. 14. APPLICATION TO PENDING CASES.
(a) In General.--This Act and the amendments made by this Act shall
apply to cases pending on and after the date of enactment of this Act.
(b) Time Limits.--In a case pending on the date of enactment of
this Act, if the amendments made by this Act establish a time limit for
taking certain action the period of which began on the date of an event
that occurred prior to the date of enactment of this Act, the period of
such time limit shall instead begin on the date of enactment of this
Act.
<all>