F

e

d

e

r

a

l

Justice Statistics Program

Bureau of Justice Statistics

U.S. Department of Justice

Office of Justice Programs

Federal Justice Statistics Program

Prisoner Petitions in the

Federal Courts, 1980-96

 

Prisoner petitions filed by State prison inmates in U.S. district court, 1995

Petitions per 1,000 inmates

 Fewer than 25

 25 to 50

 50 to 100

 100 or more
U.S. Department of Justice

Office of Justice Programs

Bureau of Justice Statistics

Prisoner Petitions in the

Federal Courts, 1980-96

Federal Justice Statistics Program

By John Scalia

BJS Statistician

October 1997, NCJ-164615
U.S. Department of Justice

Bureau of Justice Statistics

Jan M. Chaiken, Ph.D.

Director

John Scalia of the Bureau of Justice Statistics wrote this

report. Kevin J. Strom compiled the time-series data.

David Rauma, Ph.D., and George Cort of the Federal

Judicial Center provided the data to BJS for analysis.

Steven R. Schlesinger, Ph.D. of the Administrative 

Office of the U.S. Courts and Roger A. Hanson of the

National Center for State Courts reviewed the report 

for content. Carol DeFrances and Andrew H. Press of

BJS provided statistical review. Tom Hester and Tina

Dorsey edited the report. Marilyn Marbrook, assisted 

by Yvonne Boston and Jayne Robinson, administered

production.

Data presented in this report may be obtained from 

the National Archive of Criminal Justice Data at the 

University of Michigan, 1-800-999-0960.

An electronic version of this report and other reports 

are available from the BJS Internet page:

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/

Contents

Highlights, iii

Introduction, 1

Prisoner petitions in U.S. district courts, 3

Prisoner petitions in U.S. courts of appeal, 10

Background information: Types of prisoner 

petitions, 14

Methodology, 17

ii Prisoners Petitions in the Federal Courts, 1980-96
 Between 1980 and 1996, the number of petitions filed in U.S. district

courts by Federal and State inmates

increased from 23,230 to 68,235.

 While the number of petitions filed

increased, the rate at which inmates

filed petitions decreased 17% from

72.7 petitions per 1,000 inmates to

60.5.

 Fewer than 2% the petitions were

adjudicated in favor of the inmate; 

most (62%) were dismissed.

 24% of the petitions terminated in

U.S. district court were later

appealed.

 Between 1980 and 1996, the number of prisoner petitions appealed increased from 3,675 to 17,002.

 88% of Federal and State inmates

represented themselves on appeal.

Petitions by State inmates

 State inmates initated 81% of all

prisoner petitions filed during 1996;

most (73%) alleged a civil rights

violation.

 21% of State inmates under a sentence of death had a habeas corpus

petition active in the Federal courts

during 1995.

Petitions by Federal Inmates

 74% of the petitions filed by Federal

inmates challenged the constitutionality of the sentence imposed.

 Between 1987 and 1996, the number of petitions by Federal inmates

challenging the sentence imposed increased from 1,664 to 9,729.

 43% of the petitions by Federal inmates challenging the the sentence

were later appealed.

Prisoner Petitions in the Federal Courts, 1980-96 iii

Highlights

 Prisoner petitions filed in Federal courts, 1980-96

1980 1985

1980 1985

16,500

18,000

13,500

10,500

7,500

4,500

1,500

0

1996

63,000

52,500

42,000

31,500

21,000

10,500

3,500

0

72,000

1996

1991

1991

U.S. courts of appeal

U.S. district court

Total prisoner 

petitions

State

Federal

State

Total prisoner 

petitions

Federal

Number of 

petitions
Overview

Pursuant to Federal law, Federal and

State inmates are able to file suits in

the Federal courts to: (1) challenge

the constitutionality of their imprisonment (habeas corpus); (2) redress

deprivations by government officials

of any civil rights secured by the Constitution; (3) compel government officials to perform a duty owed to the

petitioner (mandamus); and (4), in the

case of Federal inmates, to challenge

the constitutionality of the sentence

imposed (vacate sentence).

The growth in the Federal and State

prison population over the last 16

years has been accompanied by an

increase in prisoner litigation in the

Federal courts  both U.S. district

courts (trial) and U.S. courts of appeal

(appellate). Between 1980 and 1996

the number of prisoner petitions filed

in U.S. district courts by Federal and

State inmates increased nearly threefold from 23,230 during 1980 to

68,235 during 1996. Similarly, the

number of appeals involving prisoner

issues has increased fourfold from

3,675 during 1980 to 16,992 during

1996.

While the number of prisoner petitions

filed increased between 1980 and

1996, the rate at which both Federal

and State inmates filed these petitions

declined. During 1980 approximately

72.7 prisoner petitions were filed in

U.S. district court for every 1,000 inmates incarcerated in Federal and

State prisons. By 1996 the filing rate

had decreased approximately 17%

to 60.5 petitions for every 1,000

inmates.

An increasing proportion of prisoner

petitions terminated in U.S. district

court were appealed to the U.S.

courts of appeal. Between 1980 and

1996 the rate at which prisoner petitions were appealed increased 48%

 from 17.2 appellate filings for every

100 district court terminations during

1980 to 25.4 during 1996.

More than half of the prisoner petitions filed in the Federal courts (both

the U.S. district courts and U.S.

courts of appeal) alleged civil rights

violations. About a quarter of the petitions sought habeas corpus relief.

Petitions filed by Federal inmates,

however, primarily challenged the

constitutionality of the sentence imposed: approximately two-thirds of

the petitions filed by Federal inmates

were petitions to vacate the sentence

imposed.

Tracking prisoner petitions

through the Federal courts

Petitions filed by Federal and State

inmates in the Federal courts can

take several years to process to their

conclusion. After the district court disposes of the petition, the petitioner

has the option to appeal the district

court ruling to the U.S. courts of appeal. Of those prisoner petitions filed

in U.S. district court by Federal and

State inmates during 1990, almost all

(99%) had been disposed of by the

district court by the end of 1995

Prisoner Petitions in the Federal Courts, 1980-96 1

 Tracking prisoner petitions through the Federal courts, 1990-95

Appealed: 106

Dismissed: 6

Remanded: 2

Pending: 61

Transferred: 1 Transferred: 1 Transferred: 1

Pending: 250

For government: 14,417 For both: 156 For inmate: 549 Not reported: 2,540

Adjudicated: 17,662

Appealed: 3,440

Dismissed: 156

Remanded: 17

Pending: 1,618

Transferred: 30

Appealed: 156

Dismissed: 5

Remanded: 0

Pending: 12

Transferred: 0

Appealed: 147

Dismissed: 7

Remanded: 0

Pending: 74

Appealed: 676

Dismissed: 42

Remanded: 4

Pending: 281

Appealed: 5,254

Dismissed: 234

Remanded: 25

Transferred: 30

Pending: 2,439

Filed in U.S. district court during 1990: 40,695

Cases dismissed: 22,783 

Reversed*: 204

Affirmed*: 1,473 Affirmed*: 7

Reversed*: 1

Affirmed*: 62

Reversed*: 7

Affirmed*: 314

Reversed*: 46

Affirmed*: 2,311

Reversed*: 329

Affirmed*: 31

Reversed*: 9

*Includes cases partially affirmed and partially reversed.

Figure 1

Introduction
(figure 1). About a quarter (23.7%) of

those cases filed in U.S. district courts

during 1990 were appealed to the

U.S. courts of appeal.

Fewer than 2% of those petitions filed

during 1990 were, at least partially,

adjudicated in favor of the inmate by

the end of 1995. Approximately 11%

were still pending with either the 

district court or the appellate court 

5 years after the initial filing.

Petitions dismissed

More than half (56%) of the prisoner

petitions filed in U.S. district court 

during 1990 were dismissed by the

district court. About a quarter (23.1%)

of those cases dismissed were appealed. By the end of 1995, the 

appellate courts had disposed of 54%

of these cases. Of those cases disposed of by the appellate courts, the

district courts rulings were affirmed 

(at least in part) in 80.7% of the cases

and reversed (at least in part) in 11%

of the cases.

Petitions adjudicated

Less than half (43%) of the prisoner

petitions filed in U.S. district court during 1990 were adjudicated by the district court. Almost all (95%) of those

cases adjudicated (where a judgment

was reported) were adjudicated exclusively in favor of the government 

in an additional 1% of the cases both

the government and the inmate partially prevailed. 

About a quarter (24%) of those cases

adjudicated by the district court were

appealed. The government filed an

appeal in 26.8% of the cases decided

in favor of the inmate whereas inmates appealed 23.9% of the cases

decided in favor of the government.

The government succeeded in having

the district courts’ ruling overturned in

10% of the cases. 

Petitions pending

Fewer than 1% of those prisoner petitions filed with the district court during

1990 were still pending with the district court at the end of 1995. However, of the 250 cases identified as

pending with the district court at the

end of 1995, about 42% had been 

appealed. (A litigant may file interlocutory appeals addressing specific 

aspects of the case or appeals addressing the timeliness of the district

court’s handling of the case.) Twothirds of those cases disposed of by

the appellate courts affirmed the district courts’ handling of the cases.

Legal representation of Federal

and State inmates

While prisoner petitions involve criminal defendants and  particularly in

the case of habeas corpus  routinely address criminal law issues,

these proceedings are considered civil

rather than criminal in nature. Unlike

criminal proceedings, parties involved

in civil proceedings are not entitled to

court-appointed counsel if they are

indigent.1

 The Federal courts, however, are provided some discretion in

appointing counsel for indigent litigants. Counsel for the indigent is 

appointed at the discretion of the

courts when warranted such as in

cases where the facts are undisputed

but the issues are too complex for an

inmate to handle.2

Previous BJS reports indicated that

more than 90% of inmates who file

prisoner petitions in U.S. district court

file their petitions pro se  representing themselves before the court.3

 

Similarly, 88% of the inmates involved

in an appeal of a prisoner petition 

represented themselves on appeal

(table 1). (Data describing the petitioners’ representation were unavailable for petitions handled in U.S.

district courts.) Federal inmates were

more likely than State inmates to be

represented by legal counsel on 

appeal. Legal counsel represented 

approximately 18% of Federal inmates on appeal, compared to fewer

than 10% of State inmates.

Inmates who alleged civil rights violations were more likely to represent

themselves on appeal than other petitioners. During 1995, 91% of Federal

inmates and 94.7% of State inmates

who filed civil rights petitions represented themselves on appeal,

whereas 76.3% of Federal inmates

and 81.6% of State inmates seeking

habeas corpus relief represented

themselves on appeal.

 2 Prisoner Petitions in the Federal Courts, 1980-96

Table 1. Representation of Federal 

and State inmates in cases filed 

in U.S. courts of appeal, 1995

Jurisdiction and Legal

type of petition Number Pro se counsel

 Total 14,992 88.3% 11.7%

Federal 3,459 81.8% 18.2%

 Vacate sentence 2,221 80.2 19.8

 Habeas corpus 456 76.3 23.7

 Death penalty 0 --- --- 

 Other 456 76.3 23.7

 Civil rights 557 91.0 9.0

 Other 225 85.3 14.7

State 11,533 90.2% 9.8%

 Habeas corpus 3,939 81.6 18.4

 Death penalty 129 3.9 96.1

 Other 3,810 84.3 15.7

 Civil rights 7,529 94.7 5.3

 Other 65 92.3 7.7

--- No cases of this type occurred in the data.

Data source: Administrative Office of the U.S.

Courts, civil data file (1995). 

1

Pennsylvania v. Finley, 481 U.S. 551 (1987. 2

28 U.S.C. § 1915.

3

Roger A. Hanson and Henry W.K. Daley,

Federal Habeas Corpus Review, BJS

Discussion Paper, NCJ-155504, 1995.
Prisoner petitions filed

During 1995 Federal and State inmates filed 60,855 prisoner petitions

in U.S. district court (table 2). Twothirds of the petitions filed alleged civil

rights violations. Habeas corpus petitions represented approximately 23%

of the caseload. The remainder were

mandamus petitions (1%) or petitions

by Federal inmates challenging a sentence (10%). State inmates filed the

majority (86%) of the petitions. 

While most of the petitions filed in the

Federal courts are filed by State inmates, because the Federal courts

have original jurisdiction over matters

dealing with Federal inmates, Federal

inmates file petitions in Federal court

at a greater rate than State inmates.

During 1995 Federal inmates filed

96.5 petitions for every 1,000 inmates

in Federal custody compared with

52.8 petitions for every 1,000 State

inmates. However, compared to

State inmates, Federal inmates file

few civil rights, habeas corpus, or

mandamus petitions. The majority

(67%) of the petitions filed by Federal

inmates challenged the constitutionality of the sentence imposed.

During 1995 State prison inmates 

incarcerated in Iowa (148.8 petitions

per 1,000 inmates), Arkansas (142.0),

and Mississippi (124.6) filed petitions

in U.S. district courts at the highest

rates (cover map). Compared to

those in other regions of the United

States, inmates incarcerated in the

South filed petitions at the highest

rate  59.8 petitions per 1,000 inmates (not shown in a table). More

than three-quarters of the petitions

filed by Southern inmates alleged civil

rights violations. Inmates incarcerated in Massachusetts (20.4), North

Dakota (22.4), and Ohio (24.7), by

contrast, filed petitions at the lowest

rates.

Prisoner Petitions in the Federal Courts, 1980-96 3

Prisoner petitions in U.S. district courts

Table 2. Petitions filed in U.S. district court by Federal and State inmates, 1995

Type of petition

Habeas corpus

Region 

and jurisdiction Total

Vacate

sentence

 Death

 penalty Other

Mandamus Civil 

 rights

1995 prison

population*

 U.S. total 60,855 5,814 169 13,966 863 40,043 1,078,545

Federal 8,637 5,814 6 1,260 485 1,072 89,538

State 52,218 -- 163 12,706 378 38,971 989,007

 Northeast 7,020 -- 12 1,696 52 5,260 156,305

 Connecticut 450 -- 0 75 3 372 14,681

 Maine 98 -- ** 17 0 81 1,455

 Massachusetts 212 -- ** 62 9 141 10,369

 New Hampshire 81 --  28 1 52 2,002

 New Jersey 845 -- 0 241 1 603 22,808

 New York 2,495 -- 0 627 14 1,854 68,489

 Pennsylvania 2,697 -- 12 597 20 2,068 32,402

 Rhode Island 90 -- ** 32 4 54 2,854

 Vermont 52 -- ** 17 0 35 1,245

 Midwest 10,362 -- 33 2,464 59 7,806 192,757

 Illinois 1,587 -- 15 279 17 1,276 37,658

 Indiana 1,604 -- 2 588 10 1,004 16,125

 Iowa 879 -- ** 87 10 782 5,906

 Kansas 351 --  83 3 265 7,055

 Michigan 1,581 -- ** 368 3 1,210 41,112

 Minnesota 159 -- ** 46 0 113 4,628

 Missouri 1,903 -- 11 405 4 1,483 19,151

 Nebraska 373 -- 0 50 0 323 3,051

 North Dakota 15 -- ** 4 2 9 670

 Ohio 1,097 -- 5 358 7 727 44,338

 South Dakota 105 -- 0 50 0 55 1,864

 Wisconsin 708 -- ** 146 3 559 11,199

 South 25,541 -- 92 5,788 182 19,479 427,105

 Alabama 1,941 -- 6 517 1 1,417 20,549

 Arkansas 1,188 -- 2 192 6 988 8,364

 Delaware 295 -- 1 76 1 217 4,799

 District of Columbia 272 -- ** 19 5 248 9,277

 Florida 3,034 -- 10 1,100 39 1,885 63,879

 Georgia 1,904 -- 0 375 21 1,508 34,266

 Kentucky 946 -- 0 165 6 775 9,928

 Louisiana 1,899 -- 3 319 28 1,549 16,976

 Maryland 928 -- 0 202 5 721 21,124

 Mississippi 1,261 -- 3 180 1 1,077 10,124

 North Carolina 848 -- 1 82 7 758 27,313

 Oklahoma 758 -- 7 286 3 462 14,568

 South Carolina 850 -- 3 183 7 657 18,864

 Tennessee 1,326 -- 0 234 10 1,082 13,040

 Texas 5,263 -- 46 1,437 26 3,754 127,766

 Virginia 2,605 -- 10 364 14 2,217 23,890

 West Virginia 223 -- ** 57 2 164 2,378

 West 9,155 -- 26 2,711 81 6,337 212,840

 Alaska 78 -- ** 28 0 50 2,832

 Arizona 1,638 -- 3 332 14 1,289 21,341

 California 4,172 -- 17 1,503 35 2,617 135,133

 Colorado 672 -- 0 97 2 573 9,508

 Hawaii 112 -- ** 30 1 81 2,812

 Idaho 105 -- 0 25 0 80 3,079

 Montana 106 -- 1 24 0 81 1,601

 Nevada 702 -- 2 214 3 483 7,599

 New Mexico 206 -- 0 78 0 128 4,209

 Oregon 387 -- 2 135 23 227 7,812

 Utah 207 -- 1 24 1 181 3,985

 Washington 685 -- 0 195 2 488 11,679

 Wyoming 85 --  26 0 59 1,250

Note: Excludes transfers, remands, and statistical closures. Detail does not sum to total; total for

State includes petitions filed by inmates in the custody of the outlying territories  Puerto Rico, Virgin

Islands, Guam, and the Northern Marianas Islands.

-- No Federal jurisdiction.

*Data source: BJS, Correctional Populations in the United States, 1995, NCJ-163916.

**Jurisdiction without a death penalty during 1995.

Jurisdiction had no prisoners under a sentence of death during 1995.
Trends in prisoner petitions filed

Cases filed

Between 1980 and 1996 the number

of petitions filed in U.S. district courts

by Federal and State inmates increased threefold  from 23,230 during 1980 to 68,235 during 1996 (table

3). Petitions filed by Federal inmates

increased at a slightly faster rate (8%

average annual rate) than those filed

by State inmates (7% average annual

increase). 

The increase in State prisoner petitions primarily reflects a threefold increase in the number of civil rights

petitions filed. Civil rights petitions

filed by State inmates increased an

average of 8% annually  increasing

from 12,395 during 1980 to 39,996

during 1996. Federal civil rights petitions, by contrast, increased 5% annually  from 603 during 1980 to

1,219 during 1996.

Similarly, the number of habeas corpus petitions by State inmates increased at a faster rate than those by

Federal inmates. The number of

State habeas corpus petitions increased almost 5% annually  from

7,029 during 1980 to 14,726 during

1996  while the number of Federal

petitions remained relatively stable.

While the increase in petitions filed by

State inmates reflects an increase in

civil rights petitions, the increase in

the number of petitions filed by Federal inmates primarily reflects an 

increase in the number of petitions

challenging the sentence imposed.

Between 1980 and 1996, petitions by

Federal inmates challenging the sentence imposed increased more than

sevenfold  from 1,322 during 1980

to 9,729 during 1996 (figure 2).4

Most (96%) of the increase in petitions challenging the sentence imposed followed the implementation of

major reforms to Federal sentencing

policy. The Sentencing Reform Act 

of 1984, which became effective on 

November 1, 1987, established the

Federal sentencing guidelines, abolished parole, reduced good conduct

time, and required increased terms of

imprisonment for recidivists. Further,

the Sentencing Reform Act, the AntiDrug Abuse Acts of 1986 and 1988,

and the Comprehensive Crime Control Act of 1990, established mandatory minimum terms of imprisonment

for defendants trafficking drugs and

defendants using a firearm to commit

an offense.

 4 Prisoner Petitions in the Federal Courts, 1980-96

Table 3. Prisoner petitions filed in U.S. district court by Federal 

and State inmates, 1980-96

Jurisdiction and type of petition

Federal State

Year Total Total

Vacate

sentence

Habeas

corpus

Mandamus Civil 

 rights Total

Habeas

corpus

Mandamus Civil 

 rights

1980 23,230 3,661 1,322 1,413 323 603 19,569 7,029 145 12,395

1981 27,655 4,053 1,248 1,629 342 834 23,602 7,786 177 15,639

1982 29,275 4,328 1,186 1,927 381 834 24,947 8,036 172 16,739

1983 30,765 4,354 1,311 1,914 339 790 26,411 8,523 202 17,686

1984 31,093 4,526 1,427 1,905 372 822 26,567 8,335 198 18,034

1985 33,452 6,262 1,527 3,405 373 957 27,190 8,520 180 18,490

1986 33,758 4,432 1,556 1,679 427 770 29,326 9,040 215 20,071

1987 37,279 4,507 1,664 1,808 313 722 32,772 9,524 276 22,972

1988 38,825 5,130 2,071 1,867 330 862 33,695 9,867 270 23,558

1989 41,472 5,577 2,526 1,818 315 918 35,895 10,545 311 25,039

1990 42,623 6,611 2,970 1,967 525 1,149 36,012 10,817 352 24,843

1991 42,452 6,817 3,328 2,112 378 999 35,635 10,325 267 25,043

1992 48,417 6,997 3,983 1,507 597 910 41,420 11,296 479 29,645

1993 53,436 8,456 5,379 1,467 695 915 44,980 11,574 388 33,018

1994 57,928 7,700 4,628 1,441 491 1,140 50,228 11,908 395 37,925

1995 63,634 8,951 5,988 1,343 510 1,110 54,593 13,627 397 40,569

1996 68,235 13,069 9,729 1,703 444 1,219 55,166 14,726 444 39,996

Note: Includes transfers, remands, and statistical closures.

Data source: Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, Report of the Proceedings 

of the Judicial Conference of the United States, (table C-2).

 Prisoner petitions filed by Federal 

 inmates, 1980-96

Total

13,500

10,500

7,500

4,500

1,500

0

1980 1985 1991 1996

Habeas corpus

Vacate sentence

Figure 2

4

The increase in petitions to vacate the sentence

imposed between 1995 and 1996 may be the

result of the Supreme Court decision in Bailey v.

United States, __ U.S. __, 116 S.CT. 501, 113

L.Ed. 2d 472(1996). In this case the Supreme

Court limited the applicability of 18 U.S.C. §

924(e) to those cases where the defendant

actually used the weapon while committing the

offense rather than merely possessing it.
Many defendants have challenged

these sentencing reforms (and the

sentences imposed pursuant to these

reforms) on direct appellate review.

During 1995, 47,556 defendants were

convicted and sentenced in the Federal courts; 21% of these defendants

filed a direct appeal challenging some

aspect of the sentence imposed.

Most (84%) of these appellants, however, were unsuccessful. Having unsuccessfully challenged the sentence

imposed on direct appeal, many Federal inmates have turned to civil remedies in another attempt to have the

sentence vacated or otherwise

reduced.

Filing rate

While the number of prisoner petitions

filed in U.S. district courts substantially increased between 1980 and

1996, the Nation’s prison population

was also substantially increasing. Between 1980 and 1996, the number of

persons incarcerated in the Nation's

prisons (both Federal and State facilities) increased an average of 8.2%

annually  from 319,598 inmates incarcerated during 1980 to 1.13 million

during 1996 (table 4). The Federal

prison population increased at a

slightly faster rate (9% annually) than

the State prison population (8%

annually).

The increase in the prison population

has been accompanied by a similar

increase in the number of prisoner 

petitions filed in Federal court. However, accounting for the increase in

the prison population, the rate at

which inmates filed petitions declined

by approximately 17% between 1980

and 1996. During 1980, 72.7 petitions

were filed for every 1,000 inmates incarcerated in both Federal and State

prisons. By 1996 the filing rate had

decreased to 60.5 petitions (figure 3).

The filing rate for Federal inmates

varied substantially between 1980 and

1996. After an overall increase

between 1980 and 1985, the rate at

which Federal inmates filed prisoner

petitions decreased by 43% between

1985 and 1995. This decline was

largely attributable to substantial decreases in the rates in which Federal

inmates filed habeas corpus, civil

rights, and mandamus petitions. The

rate at which Federal inmates filed 

habeas corpus petitions declined by

84%; civil rights by 53%; and mandamus by 46%.

However, between 1995 and 1996,

the filing rate increased by 37%. This

increase was primarily attributable to

a substantial increase in the rate at

which Federal inmates filed petitions

to vacate the sentence imposed. 

Beginning in 1988 (after the implementation of Federal sentencing reforms) petitions by Federal inmates to

vacate the sentence imposed began

to increase. While Federal inmates

were filing habeas corpus, civil rights,

and mandamus petitions at lower

rates, they filed petitions to vacate the

sentence at higher rates. Between

Prisoner Petitions in the Federal Courts, 1980-96 5

Table 4. Number of persons held in

Federal and State prisons, 1980-96

Year Total Federal State

1980 319,598 23,779 295,819

1981 360,029 26,778 333,251

1982 402,914 27,311 375,603

1983 423,898 28,945 394,953

1984 448,264 30,875 417,389

1985 487,593 35,781 451,812

1986 526,436 39,781 486,655

1987 562,814 42,478 520,336

1988 606,810 44,205 562,605

1989 683,382 53,387 629,995

1990 743,382 58,838 684,544

1991 792,535 63,930 728,605

1992 850,566 72,071 778,495

1993 909,381 80,815 828,566

1994 990,147 85,500 904,647

1995 1,078,545 89,538 989,007

1996* 1,128,274 95,088 1,033,186

Note: Data represent the population as of

December 31; 

*Preliminary numbers.

Source: BJS, Correctional Populations 

in the United States, annual.

 Prisoner petitions filed in U.S. district court, 1980-96

1980 1985

Petitions 

filed per 1,000 

inmates

1991 1996

0

40

80

120

160

200

Overall

1988

Federal prisoners

State prisoners

Figure 3
1987 and 1996, the rate at which Federal inmates filed petitions challenging

the sentence imposed increased by

161%  from 39.2 petitions per 1,000

inmates during 1987 to 102.3 during

1996.

Compared to the filing rate for Federal

inmates, the filing rate for State inmates was relatively constant.

Nonetheless, the filing rate for State

inmates declined 19% between 1980

and 1996  from 66.2 petitions per

1,000 inmates during 1980 to 53.4 

petitions during 1996. Three-quarters

of the decrease in State petitions was

attributable to a decline in the rate at

which State inmates filed habeas corpus petitions. The filing rate of State

habeas corpus petitions declined 40%

 from 23.8 petitions per 1,000 inmates during 1980 to 14.3 petitions

during 1995. The filing rate for State

civil rights petitions declined by 25%

 from 41.9 during 1980 to 38.7 

during 1995.

Prisoner petitions adjudicated in

U.S. district court

Mode of disposition

During 1995 U.S. district courts disposed of 57,982 prisoner petitions.

More than half of these petitions were

dismissed (table 5). Of those cases

terminated during 1995 

 64% of those petitions filed by Federal inmates and 62% of those filed by

State inmates were dismissed;

 66% of those petitions by Federal

inmates challenging the sentence 

imposed were dismissed; and

 Mandamus petitions were dismissed

at the highest rate: 72% of those petitions filed by Federal inmates and

71% of those by State inmates.

Overall, few (1.8%) prisoner petitions

were adjudicated at trial. Civil rights

petitions, however, were the most

likely to be adjudicated by trial: almost

2.6% of civil rights petitions filed by

State inmates and 1% of those filed

by Federal inmates.

Thirty-six percent of the cases were

disposed of by means such as consent decrees, judgments on pretrial

motions, or arbitrated judgments. Of

these cases, most (80%) were disposed of following a pretrial motion 

(not shown in a table).

Disposition

Of the 57,982 prisoner petitions terminated in U.S. district court during

1995, 1.2% were adjudicated in favor

of the plaintiff  the inmate (table 6).

 6 Prisoner Petitions in the Federal Courts, 1980-96

Table 5. Mode of disposition for prisoner petitions

terminated in U.S. district court, 1995

Percent of cases

Jurisdiction and Judgment

type of petition Number* Dismissed Trial Other

 Total 57,968 62.1% 1.8% 36.1%

Federal 7,797 64.3% .3% 35.4%

 Vacate sentence 4,876 66.1 .2 33.7

 Habeas corpus 1,252 61.2 .2 38.7

 Death penalty 5 --- --- --- 

 Other 1,247 61.1 .2 38.7

 Mandamus 539 72.4 0 27.6

 Civil rights 1,130 56.0 1.0 43.0

State 50,159 61.8% 2.0% 36.2%

 Habeas corpus 11,838 58.7 .2 41.1

 Death penalty 129 66.7 .8 32.6

 Other 11,709 58.6 .2 41.2

 Mandamus 378 70.9 .8 28.3

 Civil rights 37,943 62.7 2.6 34.7

Note: Excludes transfers, remands, and statistical closures. Trial

includes cases for which a trial was scheduled but not necessarily

completed before dispositions. In some cases, the parties might

have settled before the completion of the trial.

---Too few cases to obtain statistically reliable data.

Data source: Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, 

civil data file (1995). 

*Includes 12 cases for which jurisdiction could not be determined

but excludes 14 cases for which mode of disposition could not 

be determined.

Table 6. Disposition of prisoner petitions 

terminated in U.S. district court, 1995

Percent of petitions disposed

Judgment

Jurisdiction and

type of petition

 

Number* Dismissed Inmate

Government Both

 Total 57,982 62.1% 1.2% 36.3% .4%

Federal 7,804 64.2% 3.8% 31.9% .2%

 Vacate sentence 4,883 66.0 5.1 28.7 .2

 Habeas corpus 1,252 61.2 2.0 36.3 .5

 Death penalty 5 --- --- --- --- 

 Other 1,247 61.1 1.9 36.5 .5

 Mandamus 539 72.4 2.0 25.6 0 

 Civil rights 1,130 55.8 .6 43.5 0 

State 50,166 61.8% .7% 37.0% .5%

 Habeas corpus 11,841 58.6 1.2 39.6 .5

 Death penalty 129 66.7 2.3 29.5 1.6

 Other 11,712 58.6 1.2 39.7 .5

 Mandamus 378 70.9 1.9 27.2 0 

 Civil rights 37,947 62.6 .6 36.3 .4

Note: Excludes transfers, remands, and statistical closures.

---Too few cases to obtain statistically reliable data.

Data source: Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, 

civil data file (1995). 

*Includes 12 cases for which jurisdiction could not be determined.
Additionally, in 0.4% of the cases both

the inmate and the government partially prevailed.

Compared to State inmates, a slightly

higher proportion of Federal inmates

were successful with their suits. Of

the 7,804 petitions filed by Federal 

inmates that were terminated during

1995, 4% were adjudicated at least

partially in favor of the inmate.

Approximately 5% of the petitions to 

vacate the sentence imposed were

adjudicated in favor of the inmate; 

2% of habeas corpus petitions (including the only death penalty petition),

2% of the mandamus petitions, and

0.6% of the civil rights petitions were

adjudicated in favor of the defendant,

at least in part.

In contrast to the outcome of petitions

filed by Federal inmates, of the

50,166 petitions by State inmates 

terminated during 1995, about 1%

were adjudicated at least partially in

favor of the inmate. Habeas corpus

petitions by death row inmates were

the most successful  3.9% of these

petitions were adjudicated at least

partially in favor of the inmate  and,

similar to the outcome of petitions by

Federal inmates, civil rights petitions

were the least successful  1% were

adjudicated at least partially in favor

of the inmate.

While the success rate of prisoner 

petitions is low overall, in those cases

adjudicated by the courts  not 

dismissed  inmates were slightly

more successful. Of those cases for

which there was a judgment, 3% were

adjudicated in favor of the inmate 

including 15% of petitions by Federal

inmates challenging the sentence imposed. Additionally, in 1% of the

cases both the inmate and the government partially prevailed.

Case processing time

Prisoner petitions terminated during

1995 were processed in approximately 9 months (274 days), on average (table 7). Half of the cases,

however, took less than 5 months

(161 days). Habeas corpus petitions

generally took longer (285 days) than

other types of petitions (not shown in

a table). 

Prisoner Petitions in the Federal Courts, 1980-96 7

Table 7. Case processing time for prisoner petitions terminated 

in U.S. district court, 1995

Days between filing and termination

Jurisdiction and Percentile of terminations

type of petition Number* 10th 25th 50th 75th 90th Average

 Total 57,982 8 49 161 364 681 273.9

Federal 7,804 12 53 141 297 544 228.9

 Vacate sentence 4,883 14 56 137 284 521 220.6

 Habeas corpus 1,252 11 48 129 271 492 207.8

 Death penalty 5 --- --- --- --- --- --- 

 Other 1,247 12 48 129 270 483 205.4

 Mandamus 539 22 62 191 442 784 300.1

 Civil rights 1,130 0 38 165 346 561 253.8

State 50,166 8 49 166 376 702 280.9

 Habeas corpus 11,841 19 71 182 386 745 297.4

 Death penalty 129 1 13 349 973 1,756 659.2

 Other 11,712 20 72 181 384 735 293.4

 Mandamus 378 4 22 72 206 396 160.2

 Civil rights 37,947 6 44 161 375 689 276.9

Note: Excludes transfers, remands, and statistical closures.

*Includes 12 cases for which jurisdiction could not be determined.

---Too few cases to obtain a reliable estimate.

Data source: Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, civil data file (1995). 

Table 8. Case processing time for prisoner petitions 

terminated in U.S. district court, 1995

Days between filing and termination

Jurisdiction and Percentile of terminations

mode of petition Number* 10th 25th 50th 75th 90th Average

 Total 57,982 8 49 161 364 681 273.9

Federal 7,804 12 53 141 297 544 228.9

 Dismissal 5,010 8 46 128 281 525 215.4

 Trial 23 97 197 311 517 1,257 311.0

 Other 2,764 21 68 162 321 581 251.5

State 50,166 8 49 166 376 702 280.9

 Dismissal 30,997 6 40 130 315 625 243.9

 Trial 1,011 198 339 590 1,026 1,405 590.0

 Other 18,151 13 79 223 433 738 318.9

Note: Excludes transfers, remands, and statistical closures.

*Includes 12 cases for which jurisdiction could not be determined.

Data source: Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, civil data file (1995). 
Petitions filed by State inmates took

nearly 2 months longer, on average,

than those filed by Federal inmates 

 281 days for State petitions compared to 229 days for Federal petitions. The longer case processing

time for State petitions reflects, in

part, differences in the mode of disposition between Federal and State petitions. The case processing time

reported for State inmates, however,

does not include the time spent in the

State courts or in administrative proceedings. If this time were available

and taken into account, the entire

process for State inmates would take

considerably longer than for Federal

inmates.

Case processing time varied substantially by mode of disposition (table 8).

On average, prisoner petitions 

disposed of at trial took longer 

approximately 2 years (727 days) 

to process than petitions that were

dismissed  240 days (on average)

 or those petitions disposed of by

other means  310 days on average

(not shown in a table).

However, even after accounting for

differences in mode of disposition, 

petitions by the State inmates took

longer to process than petitions by

Federal inmates:

 State petitions adjudicated at trial

took 590 days to process compared

to 311 days for Federal petitions;

 State petitions that were dismissed

took 244 days to process compared

to 215 days for Federal petitions; and

 State petitions disposed of by other

means took 319 days to process compared to 252 days for Federal

petitions.

Previous BJS reports indicated that

case processing time varies according

to the complexity of the case and

whether the inmate was represented

by counsel. Cases involving more

complex legal issues or multiple issues generally take more time to

process, on average, than cases 

involving less complex issues. For

example, civil rights petitions involving

a single issue took 268 days, on average, to process whereas petitions 

involving 2 issues took 312 days and

those involving 3 or more issues took

433 days (not shown in a table).5

 

Similar patterns were observed for 

habeas corpus petitions.6

Similarly, cases where inmates were

represented by counsel took longer

(825 days, on average) than those

where the inmates represented themselves (551 days).7

 8 Prisoner Petitions in the Federal Courts, 1980-96

5

Roger A. Hanson and Henry Daley, Challenging

the Conditions of Prisons and Jails, BJS

Discussion Paper, NCJ-151652, 1995.

6

Roger A. Hanson and Henry Daley, Federal

Habeas Corpus Review, BJS Discussion Paper,

NCJ-155504, 1995.

7

Challenging the Conditions of Prisons and 

Jails, 1995.
Prisoner Petitions in the Federal Courts, 1980-96 9

During 1995, 648 (or 21%) of inmates under a sentence

of death had a habeas corpus petition active  filed,

terminated, or otherwise pending  in the Federal

courts  U.S. district courts or U.S. courts of appeal

(table). Death row petitions represented about 2% of 

all active habeas corpus petitions in the Federal courts

during 1995 (not shown in a table). Inmates under a

sentence of death had 212.7 habeas corpus petitions 

active in the Federal courts during 1995 for every 1,000

inmates on death row (not shown in a table).

Most (65%) of these petitions were filed by inmates in

those States with the greatest number of inmates under

a sentence of death or executed during 1995. Virginia

had the greatest proportion (66%) of death row inmates

with an active habeas corpus petition (table). During

1995 Virginia executed 5 of the 56 people on its death

row.

Mode of adjudication

Of the 129 death-row petitions concluded during 1995,

fewer than 1% were adjudicated at trial (table 5). Twothirds of these petitions were dismissed; and about a

third were disposed of by means other than litigation. 

Of those petitions that were not dismissed, about 12%

were adjudicated at least partially in favor of the inmate

 7% fully and 5% partially.

Case processing time

Petitions by death row inmates took almost 2 years (659

days), on average, to process (table 7). Ten percent of

these petitions, however, took at least 4 years and 10

months to process. (Does not include case processing

time which may have previously occurred at State court

level.)

Appeals

During 1995, 129 habeas corpus petitions involving

State inmates under a sentence of death were filed with

the U.S. courts of appeal (not shown in a table). Unlike

other prisoner petitions, in nearly all (96%) of these

cases, legal counsel represented the inmate (table 1).

Almost two-thirds of those cases concluded were held

over for oral hearings  a greater fraction than of all

other types of petitions (table 10). However, while the 

appellate courts dismissed 14% of the habeas cases, 

of those cases for which there was a judgment during

1995 the district courts’ rulings were upheld in about

59% (table 11). Most (82.9%) of the dismissed cases

were terminated on procedural bases (not shown in a

table).

On average, death row petitions take longer to process

by the U.S. courts of appeal than other prisoner petitions. During 1995 habeas corpus petitions by State inmates under a sentence of death took nearly a year

(341 days), on average, to process; 10% of the cases

however, took about 21⁄2 years to process. The longer

case processing time for these cases reflected, in part,

the larger proportion held over for oral arguments (not

shown in a table).

Habeas corpus petitions by death row inmates in State prisons

Capital punishment statisticsa

Inmates under a 

sentence of death

State

Habeas corpus petitions

pending in

Federal

courtsb Numberc

Average timeserved on

death row (in

years)

Inmates

executed

during

1995d

 Total 648 3,046 6.5 56

Texas 141 404 6.5 19

California 84 420 7.0 0

Illinois 35 154 7.1 5

Pennsylvania 21 196 6.1 2

Missouri 56 92 6.1 6

Florida 47 362 6.9 3

Virginia 37 56 4.5 5

Otherc 227 1,362 5.1 16

a

Includes all inmates under a sentence of death regardless of whether

they had a habeas corpus petition active in the Federal courts during

1995.

b

Includes all inmates who filed, or whose cases were terminated or still

pending, in U.S. district courts or U.S. courts of appeal during 1995.

c

Capital Punishment 1995, BJS Bulletin, NCJ-162043, 1996. d

See, table 1 for details.
In the Federal system, parties involved in cases handled in U.S. district courts have the right to have a 

district court decision reviewed by the

U.S. courts of appeal. If the appellate

court finds that the district court mishandled the case and that the error

deprived the party of a fair trial, the

appellate court will issue an “order of

reversal” and/or a “remand.” A “reversal” annuls the district court's judgment in its entirety. A “remand,” by

contrast, requires that the district

court review its decision considering

the appellate court's ruling(s) and/or

collect additional evidence to more

appropriately adjudicate the case. 

If the appellate court, however, finds

that the district court handled the case

appropriately, it will “affirm” the district

court’s decision.

Prisoner petitions filed

During 1996, 16,992 cases involving

Federal and State prisoner petitions

were appealed to the U.S. courts of

appeal (table 9). More than half of

the cases filed on appeal originally

alleged civil rights violations. (Information describing the specific issue

raised in the appeal is unavailable.)

More than a quarter (28.7%) originally

sought habeas corpus relief; 18.1%

originally challenged the constitutionality of a Federal sentence; and, the

remainder (2%) involved other issues

such as mandamus. State prison inmates made three-fourths of the

appeals.

The issue underlying the appeal varied by whether the inmate was in Federal or State custody. Similar to

cases filed in U.S. district courts, the

majority (64.2%) of appeals that involved State inmates originally alleged

civil rights violations. Additionally,

about a third originally sought habeas

corpus relief. Two-thirds of appeals

involving Federal inmates, by contrast, originally challenged the sentence imposed.

Approximately 24% of those prisoner

petitions that were terminated in U.S.

district courts were appealed to the

U.S. courts of appeal (not shown in a

table). Petitions involving Federal inmates were appealed at nearly twice

the rate of those involving State inmates  37.1 appeals per 100 district

court terminations by Federal inmates

compared to 22.5 by State inmates.

Decisions involving civil rights petitions and petitions challenging the

sentence imposed were appealed at

the highest rates  46.5 and 42.9 petitions per 100 district court terminations, respectively.

Generally, those States where inmates filed petitions in U.S. district

court at the highest rates had the

highest appeals rates. During 1995

petitions by inmates incarcerated in

Kansas (29.6 appeals per 1,000 district court terminations), Virginia

(25.3), and Iowa (25.1) were appealed

at the highest rates (figure 4). Civil

rights petitions were appealed at the

highest rates in Virginia (18.7) and

Iowa (21.2). Kansas, however, had

the highest appeal rate of habeas corpus petitions: 19.6 appeals per 1,000 

district court terminations. By contrast, prisoner petitions by inmates 

incarcerated in Connecticut (3.4),

Massachusetts (4.0) and Hawaii (4.8)

were appealed at the lowest rates.

Trends, 1980-1995

Appeals filed

Similar to the increase in prisoner 

petitions filed in U.S. district courts,

between 1980 and 1995, the number

of prisoner petitions appealed to the

U.S. courts of appeal increased more

than fourfold  from 3,675 during

1980 to 16,992 during 1996 (table 9).

 10 Prisoner Petitions in the Federal Courts, 1980-96

Prisoner petitions in U.S. courts of appeal

Table 9. Prisoner petitions filed in U.S. circuit courts of appeal by Federal 

and State inmates, 1980-96

Number of petitions appealed

Federal State

Year Total Total

Vacate

sentence

Habeas

corpus

Civil 

rights Other Total

Habeas

corpus

Civil 

rights Other

1980 3,675 1,007 450 302 159 96 2,668 1,020 1,578 70

1981 4,311 1,155 459 344 234 118 3,156 1,258 1,851 47

1982 4,833 1,203 359 455 234 155 3,630 1,529 2,038 63

1983 5,327 1,258 388 440 282 148 4,069 1,683 2,297 89

1984 5,964 1,397 470 462 294 171 4,567 1,609 2,796 162

1985 6,532 1,510 551 531 288 140 5,022 2,172 2,772 78

1986 6,992 1,569 624 485 324 136 5,423 2,331 2,982 110

1987 8,485 1,802 712 546 349 195 6,683 2,755 3,817 111

1988 9,253 1,962 856 524 335 247 7,291 3,107 4,070 114

1989 9,557 2,065 991 493 325 256 7,492 3,168 4,224 100

1990 9,897 2,261 1,112 488 408 253 7,636 3,170 4,413 53

1991 10,454 2,338 1,154 506 389 289 8,116 3,391 4,655 70

1992 11,736 2,544 1,467 432 406 239 9,192 3,725 5,396 71

1993 12,662 2,902 1,818 421 416 247 9,760 3,612 6,044 104

1994 13,044 2,939 1774 430 506 229 10,105 3642 6385 78

1995 14,981 3,457 2,215 462 555 225 11,524 3,927 7,528 69

1996 16,992 4,446 3,078 451 624 293 12,546 4,423 8,053 70

Data source: Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, Report of the Proceedings of the Judicial 

Conference of the United States, annual (table B-1A).
Appeals involving State inmates

(10.2% average annual increase) 

increased at about the same rates as

Federal inmates (9.7% annually).

Approximately 66% of the increase in

State appeals was the result of an increase in appeals of civil rights petitions. Appeals of civil right petitions

increased an average of 11% annually

 from 1,578 during 1980 to 8,053

during 1996. Appeals of habeas 

corpus petitions also substantially 

increased during this period  from

1,020 during 1980 to 4,423 during

1995.

Approximately 76% of the increase in

Federal appeals was for petitions

challenging the sentence imposed.

These appeals increased from 450

during 1980 to 3,078 during 1996 

an average annual increase of 13%.

About 90% of this increase occurred

after the implementation of Federal

sentencing reforms in 1987.

Although fewer in number than appeals of petitions to vacate the sentence imposed, appeals of Federal

habeas corpus and civil rights petitions also increased. Appeals of 

habeas corpus petitions increased 

at an average annual rate of 3% 

from 302 during 1980 to 451 during

1996  and appeals of civil rights petitions increased 9% annually  from

159 during 1980 to 624 during 1996.

Filing rate

Between 1980 and 1996 the rate at

which Federal and State prisoner petitions were appealed increased 48%

 from 17.2 appellate filings for every

100 district court terminations during

1980 to 25.4 during 1996 (figure 5). 

The appeal rate of Federal petitions

increased at a greater rate than that

of State petitions. Appeals of Federal

petitions increased 41%  from 26.4

appeals for every 100 district court

terminations during 1980 to 37.1 

during 1995. Appeals of State petitions increased 48%  from 15.2 

appeals for every 100 district court

terminations during 1980 to 22.5 

during 1996.

Prisoner Petitions in the Federal Courts, 1980-96 11

Prisoner petitions filed by State prison inmates 

in U.S. courts of appeal, 1995

Appeals per 1,000

district court terminations

 Fewer than 7

 7 to 15

 15 to 20

 20 or more

Figure 4

Prisoner petitions filed in U.S. courts of appeal, 1980-96

1980

0

10

20

30

40

50

1985 1991 1996

Federal prisoners

State prisoners

Total

Appeals per 

100 U. S. district court

terminations

Figure 5

Note: Alaska (9.4) and Hawaii (4.8) are not depicted.
Prisoner petitions adjudicated

Mode of disposition

During 1995, 14,333 prisoner petitions

involving Federal and State inmates

were terminated in U.S. courts of 

appeal. Nearly all (93.7%) of these

cases were disposed of without oral

hearings (table 10). In 46% of the

cases, the hearings were waived.

The remainder were terminated on jurisdictional bases  the court did not

have authority to hear the case (11%)

 or procedural bases  default or

voluntary dismissal (37%).

Nearly equal proportions of appeals

involving Federal and State inmates

were disposed of without oral hearings  94.4% and 93.5%, respectively. Petitions involving State

inmates, however, were more likely

than those involving Federal

inmates to be terminated on jurisdictional or procedural bases: approximately 51.8% of petitions from State

inmates were terminated on jurisdictional or procedural bases compared

with 31.8% of Federal petitions.

Habeas corpus petitions  especially

those from inmates on death row 

were the most likely to be held for oral

hearings (table 10). During 1995 approximately 11% of all habeas corpus

petitions involving Federal and State

inmates were disposed of following an

oral hearing, compared to 6.9% or

less of other types of petitions (not

shown in a table). 

Disposition

Of the 14,333 prisoner petitions terminated in U.S. courts of appeal during

1995, the courts dismissed 52.4% of

the cases, affirmed the district courts’

decision in 41.7% of the cases, and

reversed or remanded the case to the

district court (at least in part) in 5.6%

of the cases (table 11).

Appeals involving State inmates were

more likely to be dismissed than those

involving Federal inmates. During

1995, approximately 57% of appeals

involving State inmates were dismissed compared to 37% of those involving Federal inmates. However, of

those cases terminated on their merits, the courts of appeal found an

error in nearly twice as many cases

involving State inmates as Federal inmates: 13.6% of the appeals involving

State inmates were either reversed or

remanded compared to 7.6% of the

appeals involving Federal inmates

(not shown in a table).

The courts of appeal most often overruled the decisions of the district

courts in habeas corpus cases. Of

those cases for which there was a

judgment during 1995, 21.1% of habeas corpus cases involving Federal

inmates and 19% of those involving

State inmates were reversed or remanded, at least in part. Conversely,

those cases addressing the constitutionality of Federal prison sentences

were the most likely (92%) to be affirmed on appeal (not shown in a

table).

 12 Prisoner Petitions in the Federal Courts, 1980-96

Table 10. Method of disposition for prisoner petitions 

terminated in U.S. courts of appeal, 1995

Percent of dispositions of appeals

Without oral hearings

Jurisdiction and

type of petition Number

After oral

hearings

Hearings

waived

No 

jurisdiction

Procedural

termination

 Total* 14,333 6.3% 46.3% 10.5% 36.9%

Federal 3,151 5.6% 62.5% 6.3% 25.5%

 Vacate sentence 1,973 6.1 66.8 4.7 22.5

 Habeas corpus 426 8.7 50.0 5.2 36.2

 Death penalty 0 -- -- -- -- 

 Other 426 8.7 50.0 5.2 36.2

 Civil rights 530 2.6 53.6 12.8 30.9

 Other 222 6.3 69.8 7.2 19.8

State 11,177 6.5% 41.7% 11.7 40.1%

 Habeas corpus 3,957 11.0 28.4 6.5 54.2

 Death penalty 121 62.0 25.6 .8 11.6

 Other 3,836 9.4 28.4 6.6 55.5

 Civil rights 7,170 4.0 49.0 14.6 32.4

 Other 50 2.0 60.0 8.0 30.0

---No cases of this type occurred.

*Includes 5 cases for which jurisdiction could not be determined.

Data source: Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, 

appellate data file (1995). 
Case processing time

Appeals involving prisoner petitions 

terminated during 1995 took approximately 6 months (191 days), on average, to process (table 12). Half of the

cases, however, took less than 5

months (144 days). Appeals involving

Federal inmates took slightly longer

than those involving State inmates 

222 days for Federal inmates compared with to 182 days for State inmates. The longer case processing

time for Federal petitions reflects, in

part, the longer case processing time

(237 days, on average) for petitions

challenging the sentence imposed.

Generally, appeals involving civil

rights petitions took the least amount

of time to process, on average: 178

days for Federal petitions and 175

days for State petitions. Ten percent

of these cases took about a month to

conclude.

While those petitions that were dismissed because of jurisdictional or

procedural issues took the least

amount of time to process, these

cases were on the courts’ docket for

almost 4 months (116 days), on average (not shown in a table). Those

cases that required oral hearings took

the longest to process  more than a

year, on average.

Similar to the differences at the district court level, cases where counsel

represented the inmate took much

longer to process than those in which

the inmates represented themselves.

During 1995, cases in which counsel

represented the inmate took about

50% longer (279 days, on average) 

to process than those in which the 

inmate represented himself (180

days) (not shown in table).

Prisoner Petitions in the Federal Courts, 1980-96 13

Table 11. Disposition of prisoner petitions 

terminated in U.S. courts of appeal, 1995

Percent of cases

Terminated on the merits

Jurisdiction and

type of petition Number Dismissed Affirmed Reversed

Partial 

part Remanded Other

 Total* 14,333 52.4% 41.7% 2.8% 2.0% .8% .2%

Federal 3,151 37.0% 58.0% 2.2% 1.7% .9% .2%

 Vacate sentence 1,973 31.5 63.5 2.2 2.0 .7 .1

 Habeas corpus 426 49.8 44.1 3.3 1.2 1.6 -- 

 Death penalty 0 -- -- -- -- -- -- 

 Other 426 49.8 44.1 3.3 1.2 1.6 -- 

 Civil rights 530 49.6 45.5 2.3 1.3 .6 .8

 Other 222 30.6 66.2 .5 .9 1.8 -- 

State 11,177 56.7% 37.1% 3.0% 2.1% .8% .3

 Habeas corpus 3,957 62.2 31.5 3.7 1.5 .8 .3

 Death penalty 121 14.0 49.6 17.4 17.4 -- 1.7

 Other 3,836 63.7 31.0 3.3 1.0 .8 .2

 Civil rights 7,170 53.8 40.1 2.5 2.5 .8 .2

 Other 50 46.0 48.0 6.0 -- -- -- 

*Includes 5 cases for which jurisdiction could not be determined.

---No cases of this type occurred.

Data source: Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, appellate data file (1995). 

Table 12. Case processing time for prisoner petitions 

terminated in U.S. courts of appeal, 1995

Days between filing and termination

Jurisdiction and Percentiles

type of petition Number 10th 25th 50th 75th 90th Average

 Total* 14,333 30 72 144 252 403 190.9

Federal 3,151 45 104 184 288 438 221.7

 Vacate sentence 1,973 54 120 201 303 457 237.1

 Habeas corpus 426 41 89 185 286 475 219.7

 Death penalty 0 -- -- -- -- -- -- 

 Other 426 41 89 185 286 475 219.7

 Civil rights 530 34 73 138 234 374 178.3

 Other 222 52 89 142 265 407 192.6

State 11,177 27 67 133 240 390 182.2

 Habeas corpus 3,957 23 66 143 270 415 195.1

 Death penalty 121 0 2 282 492 899 340.8

 Other 3,836 24 67 142 264 407 190.5

 Civil rights 7,170 29 68 127 227 373 175.2

 Other 50 23 75 126 201 362 163.5

*Includes 5 cases for which jurisdiction could not be determined.

--- No cases of this type occurred.

Data source: Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, civil data file (1995). 
Types of prisoner petitions

Pursuant to Federal law, Federal and

State inmates are able to file suits in

the Federal courts to: (1) challenge

the constitutionality of their imprisonment (habeas corpus); (2) redress

civil rights violations by government

officials; (3) compel government officials to perform a duty owed to the

petitioner (mandamus); and, (4) in

the case of Federal inmates, to challenge the constitutionality of the sentence imposed. (Although not

addressed in this report, Federal inmates may also file claims against

prison administrators and guards under the Federal Tort Claims Act.8

Claims filed pursuant to this act, however, are limited to those seeking to

redress damages or injuries arising

from administrative negligence.)9

Habeas corpus

The writ of habeas corpus allows Federal and State inmates to file petitions

in the Federal courts challenging the

constitutionality of their imprisonment.

The basic principle of the habeas corpus writ is that the government is accountable to the courts for a person’s

imprisonment. If the government 

cannot show that the imprisonment

conforms with the fundamental requirements of law, the person is entitled to immediate release.10

Habeas corpus petitions were originally authorized in the U.S. Constitution and were subsequently included

in the Judiciary Act of 1789.11 The 

Judiciary Act, as amended, provides

that the Federal courts shall have the

power to grant writs of habeas corpus

in all cases where the person was restrained in violation of the Constitution

or any law of the United States and

under the authority of the United

States. While the Judiciary Act only

authorized the Federal courts to hear

habeas corpus petitions filed by Federal prisoners, subsequent legislation

extended the writ to prisoners held by

the States.12 However, State inmates

are required to exhaust all remedies

available to them at the State level

before filing a petition at the Federal

level.13

The Supreme Court has generally

held that so long as there are no procedural impediments, as defined by

statute, an inmate can raise most

constitutional or jurisdictional claims in

a habeas petition.14 The Court, however, has restricted the use of habeas

corpus to raise constitutional claims

 such as fourth amendment claims

of illegally seized evidence  that

could have been adjudicated either at

trial or on direct appellate review.15

Previous BJS reports indicated that

“ineffective assistance of counsel”

was the most frequently cited reason

for habeas corpus petitions filed by

State inmates  25% of habeas corpus petitions cited ineffective counsel

as the basis for the petition. Other

commonly cited reasons include errors by the trial court (15%), due process (14%), and self-incrimination

(12%).16 In concordance with Stone v.

Powell, Fourth amendment claims of

illegal search and seizure are infrequent  5% of habeas corpus petitions surveyed cited illegal search and

seizure as the basis of the petition.15

Civil rights

Federal and State inmates may file

suits in the Federal courts alleging

civil rights violations by government

officials. The foundation for these 

petitions originates in the 14th amendment to the U.S. Constitution. The

14th amendment prohibits the States

from “depriv[ing] any person from life,

liberty, or property without due process of law.”18 The Civil Rights Act of

1871 provided the mechanism for persons to seek relief from constitutional

deprivations. Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §

1983, State officials can be held liable

for the deprivation of any civil rights

secured by the Constitution. While

this act did not address violations by

Federal officials, in 1971 the Supreme

Court extended the Civil Rights Act to

cover violations by Federal officials.19

Prison inmates, despite being explicitly denied certain rights such as

freedom of movement and freedom

from unreasonable searches and seizures, do retain certain civil rights.20 

The Supreme Court has held that to

some extent, inmates continue to enjoy the rights of religious freedom,21

speech,22 association,23 and due

process.24 And, to a greater extent,

they enjoy the right to be free from 

racial discrimination25 and cruel andunusual punishment.26 Recognizing

that access to the courts by inmates

 14 Prisoner Petitions in the Federal Courts, 1980-96

Background information: 

Types of prisoner petitions

8

United States v. Muniz (1963). 9

28 U.S.C. § 2674.

10Fay v. Noia, 372 U.S. 391 (1963). 11U.S. CONST. art. I, § 9, cl. 2; Judiciary Act of

1789, Ch. 20, 1 Stat. 73 as codified at 28

U.S.C. § 2241.

1228 U.S.C. § 2254.

1328 U.S.C. § 2254(b).

14Brown v. Allen, 344 U.S. 443 (1953). 15Stone v. Powell, 428 U.S. 465 (1976). 16Roger A. Hanson and Henry W.K. Daley,

Federal Habeas Corpus Review BJS

Discussion Paper, NCJ-155504 (1995).

17Ibid.

18U.S. CONST. amend. XIV, § 1. 19Bivens v. Six Unknown Agents of the

Federal Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388

(1971).

20Cooper v. Pate, 378 U.S. 546 (1964). 21Cruz v. Beto, 405 U.S. 319 (1972). 22Pell v. Procunier, 417 U.S. 817 (1974). 23Jones v. North Carolina Prisoners’ Labor

Union, 433 U.S. 119 (1977). 24Wolff v. McDonnell, 418 U.S. 539 (1978). 25Lee v. Washington, 390 U.S. 333 (1968). 26Rhodes v. Chapman, 452 U.S. 337 (1981).
is necessary for the protection of

these rights, the Supreme Court has

ruled that inmates are not barred from

bringing lawsuits against government

officials.27 Since this decision, the 

Supreme Court has ruled on many

cases defining the scope of inmates’

rights and their ability to use the

courts. 

Previous BJS reports indicated that

physical security (21%), medical treatment (17%), and due process (13%)

are the most frequently cited issues in

civil rights petitions filed by State inmates. Issues such as freedom of religious expression (4%), living

conditions (4%), and assaults by

guards (3%) are relatively

infrequent.28 (Data describing the

specific issues were not available in

the datasets used for this report.)

In 1980, Congress enacted the Civil

Rights of Institutionalized Persons Act

(CRIPA).29 This act sought to reduce

the number of civil rights petitions filed

in the Federal courts by requiring inmates to exhaust State-level administrative remedies before filing their

petitions in the Federal courts.30 By

requiring inmates to exhaust the available administrative remedies, Congress sought to reserve the Federal

courts for more serious civil rights 

violations or other significant constitutional issues. Further, to ensure that

civil rights petitions are handled consistently across States and institutions, the Act requires that the

institution's administrative procedures

be certified by either the Department

of Justice or the local Federal district

court. Inmates in facilities not certified are not required to exhaust the

institutional-level procedures before

filing a petition in Federal court.

Mandamus

The writ of mandamus is a judicial

remedy used to compel a lower court

or government officer to perform a

duty owed to the plaintiff.31 Like habeas corpus, mandamus is an extraordinary remedy, based in common

law, that is only used when the plaintiff has no other adequate means to

attain the desired relief.32 However,

the courts have held that mandamus

can only be used to compel a government official to perform a ministerial

or nondiscretionary duty.33 Additionally, the Federal courts do not have

jurisdiction to issue writs compelling

action by State courts and officials.34 

Consequently, mandamus petitions

are often dismissed: during 1995,

more than 70% of mandamus petitions filed by Federal and State inmates were dismissed (table 5).

Compared to other prisoner petitions,

mandamus petitions are infrequent.

Mandamus petitions tend to be varied

in nature and specific to individual 

circumstances. The courts have

granted mandamus for limited uses

such as the following: to direct lower

courts to hear and decide pending

cases in a timely manner;35 to permit

inmates to file petitions in forma 

pauperis or pro se;36 to compel 

the correction of a sentence 

computation;37 to compel a State 

to prosecute an inmate while the inmate is in the custody of another

jurisdiction;38 to allow inmates to vote

absentee, where permitted by law;39

and, to compel the payment of Federal witness fees to inmates.40 

Constitutionality of the sentence

imposed

Federal inmates may file petitions in

the Federal courts to have a sentence

vacated, set aside, or otherwise corrected upon the ground that the sentence was imposed in violation of the

Constitution or other law of the United

States, that the sentencing court was

without jurisdiction to impose the sentence, or that the sentence was

greater than the statutory maximum

authorized by law.41 The basic principle underlying these petitions is the

same as that of habeas corpus: if the

imprisonment is unlawful, the inmate

is entitled to release (or a corrected

sentence). 

While petitions challenging the sentence imposed are similar in principle

to habeas corpus petitions, in 1948,

Congress distinguished the two to address practical difficulties that had

arisen in administering the habeas

corpus jurisdiction of the Federal

courts such as: (1) to reduce the number of habeas corpus petitions filed by

Federal inmates in those Federal judicial districts where Federal correctional facilities are located; and (2) to

address practical considerations such

as evidence gathering and production

Prisoner Petitions in the Federal Courts, 1980-96 15

27See, Ex parte Hull, 312 U.S. 546 (1941) and

United States v. Muniz, 374 U.S. 150 (1963). 28Roger A. Hanson and Henry W. K. Daley,

Challenging the Conditions of Prisons and

Jails, BJS Discussion Paper, NCJ-151652,

1995.

29Pub. L. No.: 96-247, 97 Stat. 349 (1980)

(codified in scattered sections of 42 U.S.C.).

3042 U.S.C. § 1997e.

3128 U.S.C. § 1361.

32Ex parte Fahey, 332 U.S. 258 (1947). 33Marquez-Ramos v. Reno, 69 F.3d 477 (1995). 34See, Gurley v. Superior Court of Mecklenburg

County, 411 F.2d 586 (4th Cir. 1969). 35See, Johnson v. Rogers, 917 F.2d 1283 (10th 

Cir. 1990) but, see, In Re Hinton, 61 F.3d 900,

1995 WL 417865 (4th Cir.).

36In Re Smith, 600 F.2d 714 (8th Cir. 1979); 

McNeil v. Guthrie, 945 F.2d 1163 (10th Cir. 1991).

37Savage v. Henderson, 475 F.2d 78 (5th Cir.

1973); Johnson v. Smith, 696 F.2d 1334 (11th

Cir. 1983); Holmes v. U.S. Board of Parole, 541

F.2d 1243 (7th Cir. 1976).

38Smith v. Hooey, 393 U.S. 374 (1969). 39O’Brien v. Skinner, 414 U.S. 524 (1974). 40Demarest v. Manspeaker, 498 U.S. 184

(1991).

4128 U.S.C. § 2255.
of witnesses.42 Since habeas corpus

petitions pertain to the legality of the

imprisonment (including an illegal 

sentence), inmates are required to 

file habeas corpus petitions in the 

judicial district in which they are imprisoned rather than the district in

which they were convicted and/or

sentenced.43

Prior to the enactment of 28 U.S.C. §

2255, the geographical separation of

the sentencing court and the Federal

prison presented a problem for the

Federal courts: habeas corpus petitions were disproportionately concentrated in certain judicial districts. For

instance, between 1942 and 1948,

63% of all habeas corpus petitions

filed by Federal inmates were filed in

5 (Northern California, Northern Georgia, Kansas, Western Washington,

and Western Missouri) of the then 84

Federal judicial districts.44

At the request of the Federal judiciary,

Congress created a new statute that

distinguished petitions challenging the

sentence imposed from those that

otherwise challenged the constitutionality of the imprisonment.45 This new

statute required inmates who challenged the sentence imposed to file

the petition in the district in which they

were originally sentenced.46 The remaining habeas corpus cases would

continue to be filed in the district in

which the inmate was confined.

 16 Prisoner Petitions in the Federal Courts, 1980-96

42Ibid. 43Ahrens v. Clark, 335 U.S. 188 (1948).

44William H. Speck, "Statistics on Federal

Habeas Corpus," Ohio State Law Journal, 

vol. 10, 1949, pp. 337-352. 4528 U.S.C. § 2255.

4628 U.S.C. § 1651(a).

Prison Litigation Reform Acta

The Prison Litigation Reform Act, enacted in April 1996,

requires that before an inmate can file a civil rights action in Federal court the inmate must 

 exhaust all available administrative remedies before

filing the case whether or not the facility’s grievance

procedures were certified by the Department of Justice

or the Federal court; and

 show physical injury in order to receive damages for

mental or emotional injury suffered while in custody. 

Additionally, the Act generally prohibits an inmate from

filing a petition in forma pauperis (as an indigent without

liability for court fees and costs) if the inmate has filed

three or more actions in Federal court that were dismissed as frivolous or malicious or for failing to state a

claim on which relief can be granted. Further, inmates

filing petitions in forma pauperis are required to pay the

appropriate filing fees (and costs, where applicable)

from their existing assets or any funds available to

them through their trust fund accounts within the correctional system.

This act also provides for sanctions to be imposed on

Federal inmates who abuse the court system. The act

authorizes the Federal courts to order the revocation of

any unvested good time of Federal inmates whose petitions were dismissed because it was filed for malicious

purposes, solely to harass the other party, or because

the inmate presented false testimony or evidence. 

Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Actb

The Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act, also

enacted in April 1996, addresses habeas corpus petitions that are filed in the Federal courts. Like the

Prison Litigation Reform Act, this act requires State 

inmates to exhaust all available remedies at the State

level before filing a habeas corpus petition in Federal

court. Additionally, the Act establishes a statute of limitation whereby both Federal and State inmates have 

1 year from the time their conviction becomes final 

after the direct appeals of their conviction and/or sentence are exhausted  to file a habeas petition in Federal court. However, if the inmate was provided

counsel for any post-conviction proceeding (such as direct appeal of the conviction), then the petition must be

filed within 6 months.

The act also requires successive petitions to be approved by a panel of the applicable Federal court of 

appeals. Successive petitions are limited to cases that

present newly discovered evidence that would have 

undermined the jury’s verdict or that involve new constitutional rights that have been retroactively applied by

the Supreme Court. Additionally, this act defined the

Federal courts' ability to adjudicate habeas corpus petitions by State inmates. The Federal courts are required to show deference to the determination of the

State courts, provided that these determinations are

neither “contrary to” nor an “unreasonable application

of” clearly established Federal law as determined by

the Supreme Court.

 Recent Federal legislation addressing prisoner petitions

a

Pub. L. No. 104-134, 110 Stat. 1321 (codified as amended 

in scattered sections of 18, 28, and 42 U.S.C.). b

Pub. L. No. 104-132, 110 Stat. 1218 (codified as amended in

scattered sections of 28 U.S.C.).
The primary source of data for 

tables presented in this report is the

Federal Judicial Center (FJC) Integrated database. The Integrated 

Database is composed of the criminal,

civil, and appellate data files maintained by the Administrative Office 

of the U.S. Courts. These data are

archived at the National Archive of

Criminal Justice Data by the FJC 

(ICPSR 8429). Data tabulations, except where otherwise noted, were

prepared from BJS staff analysis of

these databases.

Time-series data were compiled from

the annual reports of the Judicial Conference of the United States. Prior to

1992, the period reported by the Judicial Conference was July 1 through

June 30; beginning in 1992, however,

the reporting period was changed to

October 1 through September 30 to

correspond to the Federal fiscal year.

No effort was made to correct for the

missing 3 months (7/92 to 9/92) of

data.

Prisoner Petitions in the Federal Courts, 1980-96 17

Methodology