"Effective Death Penalty Apeals Bill" Introduced in House

By Jeralyn, Section Legislation
Posted on Wed Nov 04, 2009 at 10:23:20 AM EST
Tags: habeas, innocence, death penalty (all tags)

Share This: Digg!

Recognizing the difficulty that death row inmates have in bringing innocence claims before the court, Rep. Hank Johnson (D-GA) has introduced H.R. 3986, "The Effective Death Penalty Appeals Act." (Received by e-mail from Amnesty International USA , no link yet:)

When a person facing execution has strong evidence of his innocence, he should have ample opportunity to bring those claims back into a court of law. The law as it stands today is flawed in this respect. Rep. Johnson's bill would ensure that death row inmates have the opportunity to present newly discovered evidence of innocence.

Given that 139 people have been wrongfully convicted and sent to death row in the last three decades in the United States, it is especially important that lawmakers take a close look at the flaws in a system that irreversibly takes human life.

This bill would help inmates like Troy Davis, who due to AEDPA, came within hours of being executed because courts said he could not raise his factual innocence claim. In August, the Supreme Court ruled David should be allowed a new hearing to establish his innocence. Legislation is needed to help others in this situation. [More...]

H.R. 3986 would amend title 28, United States Code, to clarify the availability of Federal habeas corpus relief for a person who is sentenced to death though actually innocent.

The text of the bill is here. Joining Rep. Johnson as co-sponsors are Reps. Jerome Nadler, John Conyers, Bobby Scott , Anthony Wiener, Sheila Jackson-Lee and John Lewis.

The bill clarifies federal habeas statutes to allow inmates sentenced to death to bring factual innocence claims. Currently, 28 USC 2254 provides:

(d) 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 that was adjudicated on the merits in State court proceedings unless the adjudication of the claim—

(1) resulted in a decision that was contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly established Federal law, as determined by the Supreme Court of the United States; or
(2) resulted in a decision that was based on an unreasonable determination of the facts in light of the evidence presented in the State court proceeding.

This bill strikes the ";or" at the end of those subsections and adds the following additional sub-section:

(3) resulted in, or left in force, a sentence of death that was imposed without consideration of newly discovered evidence which, in combination with the evidence presented at trial, demonstrates that the applicant is probably not guilty of the underlying offense.'.

For second and successive state habeas petitions under 28 USC 2244(b) it adds:

(5) A claim that an applicant was sentenced to death without consideration of newly discovered evidence which, in combination with the evidence presented at trial, could reasonably be expected to demonstrate that the applicant is probably not guilty of the underlying offense may be presented in a second or successive habeas corpus application.'.

For second and successive federal habeas petitions under 28 USC 2255(h) it adds:

(3) a claim that an applicant was sentenced to death without consideration of newly discovered evidence which, in combination with the evidence presented at trial, could reasonably be expected to demonstrate that the applicant is probably not guilty of the underlying offense.'.

The bill has been referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.

< 2 More Votes For a Public Option In the House | Bi-Partisan Plan to Close Guantanamo Presented >

"Effective Death Penalty Apeals Bill" Introduced in House | 5 comments (5 topical)

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

One would hope that this revision (none / 0) (#1)
by inclusiveheart on Wed Nov 04, 2009 at 11:07:49 AM EST

makes it through the Congress.

Not as good as repealing the death penalty statutes, but it is an improvement.

Did they get a supporting statement (none / 0) (#2)
by andgarden on Wed Nov 04, 2009 at 01:12:13 PM EST

from Bob Barr? There is some danger in that, according to him, this was always supposed to have been possible, and debating the issue in Congress now could cloud that.

What do you predict are the chances these (none / 0) (#3)
by oculus on Wed Nov 04, 2009 at 03:48:43 PM EST

amendments will pass? And will the federal government fund the attorneys needed to represent each side?

: underlying reason (none / 0) (#5)
by diogenes on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 03:38:35 AM EST

And once this bill passes then Death Penalty opponents will add these costs as further "proof" that we should get rid of the death penalty because it is too "expensive".

Why should these additional grounds for relief (none / 0) (#4)
by Peter G on Wed Nov 04, 2009 at 04:49:34 PM EST

... be limited to death penalty cases? Isn't all punishment of the probably innocent a travesty of justice? In quite of number of such cases, the "residual doubt" present at trial (that is, doubt felt to fall short of "reasonable doubt") may have convinced the jury to spare the defendant the death penalty, resulting in a sentence of life -- even of life without parole. When newly discovered evidence that elevates that doubt into proof of probable innocence emerges -- often in the form of evidence that had previously been suppressed by police or prosecutors, but sometimes in the form of newly refined scientific developments (as in the recent arson cases) -- why is the case for release from wrongful incarceration any less compelling?