Justice for the Wrongly Accused Act - Amends the federal judicial code to make an exception to the requirement of a motion to the court of appeals before the filing of certain second or subsequent petitions for habeas corpus.
Declares that the motion requirement does not apply if the second or subsequent petition application rests solely on a claim of actual innocence arising from: (1) newly discovered evidence from forensic testing; (2) exculpatory evidence withheld from the defense at trial; or (3) newly discovered accounts by credible witnesses who recant prior testimony or establish improper action of state or federal agents.
States also that the exhaustion of remedies requirement does not apply, if the application for a writ of habeas corpus on behalf of a person in custody pursuant to a state court judgment is based on a claim that the police or prosecution withheld exculpatory, impeachment, or other evidence favorable to the defendant.
Requires the court to hold an evidentiary hearing to determine the facts relating to a claim of actual innocence if the applicant makes a credible proffer of evidence supporting the claim based on certain circumstances. Prescribes a standard for the admissibility of a witness' evidentiary hearing testimony.
[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3320 Introduced in House (IH)]
111th CONGRESS
1st Session
H. R. 3320
To amend title 28, United States Code, to provide an exception to the
requirement of motion to the court of appeals before filing certain
second or subsequent petitions for habeas corpus, and for other
purposes.
_______________________________________________________________________
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
July 23, 2009
Mr. Moore of Kansas (for himself and Mr. Payne) introduced the
following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary
_______________________________________________________________________
A BILL
To amend title 28, United States Code, to provide an exception to the
requirement of motion to the court of appeals before filing certain
second or subsequent petitions for habeas corpus, 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.
This Act may be cited as the ``Justice for the Wrongfully Accused
Act''.
SEC. 2. EXCEPTION TO REQUIREMENT OF MOTION TO COURT OF APPEALS BEFORE
FILING CERTAIN SECOND OR SUBSEQUENT PETITIONS FOR HABEAS
CORPUS.
Section 2244(b)(3) of title 28, United States Code, is amended--
(1) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``Before'' and
inserting ``Except as otherwise provided by law, before''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following:
``(F) The requirement for a motion under
subparagraph (A) does not apply if the second or
subsequent application rests solely on a claim of
actual innocence arising from--
``(i) newly discovered evidence from
forensic testing;
``(ii) exculpatory evidence withheld from
the defense at trial; or
``(iii) newly discovered accounts by
credible witnesses who recant prior testimony
or establish improper action of State or
Federal agents.''.
SEC. 3. EXHAUSTION OF REMEDIES.
Section 2254(b) of title 28, United States Code, is amended--
(1) in paragraph (1)(A), by inserting ``, unless exempted
under paragraph (4),'' after ``has''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following:
``(4) If the application is based on a claim that the
police or prosecution withheld exculpatory, impeachment, or
other evidence favorable to the defendant, the exhaustion
requirement of paragraph (1)(A) does not apply.''.
SEC. 4. EVIDENTIARY HEARING.
The final paragraph of section 2243 of title 28, United States
Code, is amended by adding at the end the following: ``If the applicant
makes a credible proffer of evidence supporting a claim of actual
innocence based on one of the circumstances described in section
2244(b)(3)(F), the court shall hold an evidentiary hearing to determine
the facts relating to the claim. If the proffer is based in whole or in
part on a witness who testified at the petitioner's trial, the witness'
evidentiary hearing testimony is only admissible if it is a recantation
or establishes improper action of State agents. If the court determines
the claim is without merit, the petitioner is barred from raising that
claim in a successor petition.''.
<all>
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights, and Civil Liberties.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Courts and Competition Policy.
Llama 3.2 · runs locally in your browser
Ask anything about this bill. The AI reads the full text to answer.
Enter to send · Shift+Enter for new line