169
‘‘§ 2265. Application to State unitary review proce-
dure
‘‘(a) For purposes of this section, a ‘unitary review’
procedure means a State procedure that authorizes a per-
son under sentence of death to raise, in the course of di-
rect review of the judgment, such claims as could be raised
on collateral attack. This chapter shall apply, as provided
in this section, in relation to a State unitary review proce-
dure if the State establishes by rule of its court of last
resort or by statute a mechanism for the appointment,
compensation, and payment of reasonable litigation ex-
penses of competent counsel in the unitary review proceed-
ings, including expenses relating to the litigation of collat-
eral claims in the proceedings. The rule of court or statute
must provide standards of competency for the appoint-
ment of such counsel.
‘‘(b) To qualify under this section, a unitary review
procedure must include an offer of counsel following trial
for the purpose of representation on unitary review, and
entry of an order, as provided in section 2261(c), concern-
ing appointment of counsel or waiver or denial of appoint-
ment of counsel for that purpose. No counsel appointed
to represent the prisoner in the unitary review proceedings
shall have previously represented the prisoner at trial in
the case for which the appointment is made unless the
170
prisoner and counsel expressly request continued represen-
tation.
‘‘(c) Sections 2262, 2263, 2264, and 2266 shall apply
in relation to cases involving a sentence of death from any
State having a unitary review procedure that qualifies
under this section. References to State ‘post-conviction re-
view’ and ‘direct review’ in such sections shall be under-
stood as referring to unitary review under the State proce-
dure. The reference in section 2262(a) to ‘an order under
section 2261(c)’ shall be understood as referring to the
post-trial order under subsection (b) concerning represen-
tation in the unitary review proceedings, but if a tran-
script of the trial proceedings is unavailable at the time
of the filing of such an order in the appropriate State
court, then the start of the 180-day limitation period
under section 2263 shall be deferred until a transcript is
made available to the prisoner or counsel of the prisoner.
‘‘§ 2266. Limitation periods for determining applica-
tions and motions
‘‘(a) The adjudication of any application under sec-
tion 2254 that is subject to this chapter, and the adjudica-
tion of any motion under section 2255 by a person under
sentence of death, shall be given priority by the district
court and by the court of appeals over all noncapital mat-
ters.
171
‘‘(b)(1)(A) A district court shall render a final deter-
mination and enter a final judgment on any application
for a writ of habeas corpus brought under this chapter
in a capital case not later than 180 days after the date
on which the application is filed.
‘‘(B) A district court shall afford the parties at least
120 days in which to complete all actions, including the
preparation of all pleadings and briefs, and if necessary,
a hearing, prior to the submission of the case for decision.
‘‘(C)(i) A district court may delay for not more than
one additional 30-day period beyond the period specified
in subparagraph (A), the rendering of a determination of
an application for a writ of habeas corpus if the court is-
sues a written order making a finding, and stating the
reasons for the finding, that the ends of justice that would
be served by allowing the delay outweigh the best interests
of the public and the applicant in a speedy disposition of
the application.
‘‘(ii) The factors, among others, that a court shall
consider in determining whether a delay in the disposition
of an application is warranted are as follows:
‘‘(I) Whether the failure to allow the delay
would be likely to result in a miscarriage of justice.
‘‘(II) Whether the case is so unusual or so com-
plex, due to the number of defendants, the nature of
172
the prosecution, or the existence of novel questions
of fact or law, that it is unreasonable to expect ade-
quate briefing within the time limitations established
by subparagraph (A).
‘‘(III) Whether the failure to allow a delay in
a case, that, taken as a whole, is not so unusual or
so complex as described in subclause (II), but would
otherwise deny the applicant reasonable time to ob-
tain counsel, would unreasonably deny the applicant
or the government continuity of counsel, or would
deny counsel for the applicant or the government the
reasonable time necessary for effective preparation,
taking into account the exercise of due diligence.
‘‘(iii) No delay in disposition shall be permissible be-
cause of general congestion of the court’s calendar.
‘‘(iv) The court shall transmit a copy of any order
issued under clause (i) to the Director of the Administra-
tive Office of the United States Courts for inclusion in
the report under paragraph (5).
‘‘(2) The time limitations under paragraph (1) shall
apply to—
‘‘(A) an initial application for a writ of habeas
corpus;
‘‘(B) any second or successive application for a
writ of habeas corpus; and
173
‘‘(C) any redetermination of an application for
a writ of habeas corpus following a remand by the
court of appeals or the Supreme Court for further
proceedings, in which case the limitation period shall
run from the date the remand is ordered.
‘‘(3)(A) The time limitations under this section shall
not be construed to entitle an applicant to a stay of execu-
tion, to which the applicant would otherwise not be enti-
tled, for the purpose of litigating any application or
appeal.
‘‘(B) No amendment to an application for a writ of
habeas corpus under this chapter shall be permitted after
the filing of the answer to the application, except on the
grounds specified in section 2244(b).
‘‘(4)(A) The failure of a court to meet or comply with
a time limitation under this section shall not be a ground
for granting relief from a judgment of conviction or sen-
tence.
‘‘(B) The State may enforce a time limitation under
this section by petitioning for a writ of mandamus to the
court of appeals. The court of appeals shall act on the
petition for a writ or mandamus not later than 30 days
after the filing of the petition.
‘‘(5)(A) The Administrative Office of United States
Courts shall submit to Congress an annual report on the
174
compliance by the district courts with the time limitations
under this section.
‘‘(B) The report described in subparagraph (A) shall
include copies of the orders submitted by the district
courts under paragraph (1)(B)(iv).
‘‘(c)(1)(A) A court of appeals shall hear and render
a final determination of any appeal of an order granting
or denying, in whole or in part, an application brought
under this chapter in a capital case not later than 120
days after the date on which the reply brief is filed, or
if no reply brief is filed, not later than 120 days after
the date on which the answering brief is filed.
‘‘(B)(i) A court of appeals shall decide whether to
grant a petition for rehearing or other request for rehear-
ing en banc not later than 30 days after the date on which
the petition for rehearing is filed unless a responsive
pleading is required, in which case the court shall decide
whether to grant the petition not later than 30 days after
the date on which the responsive pleading is filed.
‘‘(ii) If a petition for rehearing or rehearing en banc
is granted, the court of appeals shall hear and render a
final determination of the appeal not later than 120 days
after the date on which the order granting rehearing or
rehearing en banc is entered.
175
‘‘(2) The time limitations under paragraph (1) shall
apply to—
‘‘(A) an initial application for a writ of habeas
corpus;
‘‘(B) any second or successive application for a
writ of habeas corpus; and
‘‘(C) any redetermination of an application for
a writ of habeas corpus or related appeal following
a remand by the court of appeals en banc or the Su-
preme Court for further proceedings, in which case
the limitation period shall run from the date the re-
mand is ordered.
‘‘(3) The time limitations under this section shall not
be construed to entitle an applicant to a stay of execution,
to which the applicant would otherwise not be entitled, for
the purpose of litigating any application or appeal.
‘‘(4)(A) The failure of a court to meet or comply with
a time limitation under this section shall not be a ground
for granting relief from a judgment of conviction or sen-
tence.
‘‘(B) The State may enforce a time limitation under
this section by applying for a writ of mandamus to the
Supreme Court.
‘‘(5) The Administrative Office of United States
Courts shall submit to Congress an annual report on the
176
compliance by the courts of appeals with the time limita-
tions under this section.’’.
(b) TECHNICAL AMENDMENT.—The table of chapters
at the beginning of part VI of title 28, United States Code,
is amended by adding after the item relating to chapter
153 the following new item:
‘‘154.
Special
habeas
corpus
procedures
in
capital
cases ............................................................................ 2261’’.
(c) EFFECTIVE DATE.—Chapter 154 of title 28,
United States Code (as added by subsection (a)) shall
apply to cases pending on or after the date of enactment
of this Act.
SEC. 908. TECHNICAL AMENDMENT.
Section 408(q) of the Controlled Substances Act (21
U.S.C. 848(q)) is amended by amending paragraph (9)
to read as follows:
‘‘(9) Upon a finding that investigative, expert, or
other services are reasonably necessary for the representa-
tion of the defendant, whether in connection with issues
relating to guilt or the sentence, the court may authorize
the defendant’s attorneys to obtain such services on behalf
of the defendant and, if so authorized, shall order the pay-
ment of fees and expenses therefor under paragraph (10).
No ex parte proceeding, communication, or request may
be considered pursuant to this section unless a proper
showing is made concerning the need for confidentiality.
177
Any such proceeding, communication, or request shall be
transcribed and made a part of the record available for
appellate review.’’.
SEC. 909. SEVERABILITY.
If any provision of this title, an amendment made by
this title, or the application of such provision or amend-
ment to any person or circumstance is held to be unconsti-
tutional, the remainder of this title, the amendments made
by this title, and the application of the provisions of such
to any person or circumstances shall not be affected there-
by.
Æ
HR 2768 IH——2
HR 2768 IH——3
HR 2768 IH——4
HR 2768 IH——5
HR 2768 IH——6
HR 2768 IH——7
HR 2768 IH——8
HR 2768 IH——9
HR 2768 IH——10
HR 2768 IH——11
HR 2768 IH——12
HR 2768 IH——13