I 

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. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Justice for the Wrong5 fully Accused Act’’. 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 3320 IH

1 SEC. 2. EXCEPTION TO REQUIREMENT OF MOTION TO 

2 COURT OF APPEALS BEFORE FILING CER3 TAIN SECOND OR SUBSEQUENT PETITIONS 

4 FOR HABEAS CORPUS. 

5 Section 2244(b)(3) of title 28, United States Code, 

6 is amended— 

7 (1) in subparagraph (A), by striking ‘‘Before’’ 

8 and inserting ‘‘Except as otherwise provided by law, 

9 before’’; and 

10 (2) by adding at the end the following: 

11 ‘‘(F) The requirement for a motion under 

12 subparagraph (A) does not apply if the second 

13 or subsequent application rests solely on a claim 

14 of actual innocence arising from— 

15 ‘‘(i) newly discovered evidence from 

16 forensic testing; 

17 ‘‘(ii) exculpatory evidence withheld 

18 from the defense at trial; or 

19 ‘‘(iii) newly discovered accounts by 

20 credible witnesses who recant prior testi21 mony or establish improper action of State 

22 or Federal agents.’’. 

23 SEC. 3. EXHAUSTION OF REMEDIES. 

24 Section 2254(b) of title 28, United States Code, is 

25 amended— 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 3320 IH

1 (1) in paragraph (1)(A), by inserting ‘‘, unless 

2 exempted under paragraph (4),’’ after ‘‘has’’; and 

3 (2) by adding at the end the following: 

4 ‘‘(4) If the application is based on a claim that 

5 the police or prosecution withheld exculpatory, im6 peachment, or other evidence favorable to the de7 fendant, the exhaustion requirement of paragraph 

8 (1)(A) does not apply.’’. 

9 SEC. 4. EVIDENTIARY HEARING. 

10 The final paragraph of section 2243 of title 28, 

11 United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the 

12 following: ‘‘If the applicant makes a credible proffer of evi13 dence supporting a claim of actual innocence based on one 

14 of the circumstances described in section 2244(b)(3)(F), 

15 the court shall hold an evidentiary hearing to determine 

16 the facts relating to the claim. If the proffer is based in 

17 whole or in part on a witness who testified at the peti18 tioner’s trial, the witness’ evidentiary hearing testimony 

19 is only admissible if it is a recantation or establishes im20 proper action of State agents. If the court determines the 

21 claim is without merit, the petitioner is barred from rais22 ing that claim in a successor petition.’’. 

Æ 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with BILLS