§ 19.01 Nature of Habeas Corpus

 

A habeas corpus proceeding is not a direct appeal but rather a collateral attack of a conviction by which the defendant challenges the lawfulness of his detention. Habeas corpus is a civil remedy that mandates the release from custody of an individual being held in violation of constitutional or federal law. Preiser v. Rodriguez, 411 U.S. 475 (1973).

 

§ 19.02 Standing to Petition for Habeas Corpus

 

Standing to bring a habeas corpus petition requires that at the time of such petition the defendant is in “custody,” which has been broadly construed to include probation, parole, release on bail, as well as the continued collateral consequences of a criminal sentence, e.g., loss of rights to vote and to hold public office. Lane v. Williams, 455 U.S. 624 (1982).

 

§ 19.03 Petitions in Federal Court

 

[A] State Prisoners

 

Where state law provides for habeas corpus relief, state prisoners may petition for federal relief only upon exhausting all available state remedies.  The federal petition will be dismissed if the petitioner did not previously exhaust all state remedies. Rose v. Lundy, 455 U.S. 509 (1982). 

 

A state prisoner will be denied federal relief if he fails to comply with state procedural rules governing the assertion of federal constitutional claims, Wainwright v. Sykes, 433 U.S. 72 (1977), unless he can show cause for noncompliance and demonstrate that he suffered actual prejudice. Francis v. Henderson, 425 U.S. 536 1976). Such cause can be shown if either the factual or legal basis for a claim was not reasonably available to the defense at the time the claim should have been raised. Amadeo v. Zant, 486 U.S. 214 (1988).

 

A state prisoner cannot relitigate Fourth Amendment claims at a federal habeas corpus proceeding, Stone v. Powell, 428 U.S. 465 (1976), but can relitigate:

• claims regarding sufficiency of evidence used to convict.
• claims of racial discrimination in the grand jury proceeding.
• Sixth Amendment claims of ineffective assistance of counsel.
• Miranda [384 U.S. 436] violations.

 

[B] Federal Prisoners

 

Federal prisoners seeking a writ of habeas corpus based on trial errors or grand jury racial discrimination must show cause for failing to object to the errors and demonstrate actual prejudice from such errors. United States v. Frady, 456 U.S. 152 (1982). If the petition is based on a claim of innocence, the federal prisoner generally must show that, but for the error, it is more likely than not that the jury would have found him not guilty. Schlup v. Delo, 513 U.S. 298 (1995).