United States. Congress. House. Committee on the J.

Taking Back Our Streets Act of 1995 : hearings before the Subcommittee on Crime of the Committee on the Judiciary, House of Representatives, One Hundred Fourth Congress, first session, on H.R. 3 ... January 19 and 20, 1995 online

. (page 1 of 51)
Online LibraryUnited States. Congress. House. Committee on the JTaking Back Our Streets Act of 1995 : hearings before the Subcommittee on Crime of the Committee on the Judiciary, House of Representatives, One Hundred Fourth Congress, first session, on H.R. 3 ... January 19 and 20, 1995 → online text (page 1 of 51)
Font size
QR-code for this ebook


TAKING BACK OUR STREETS ACT OF 1995



Y 4. J 89/1:104/99

Taking Back Dur Streets Act of 1995...

HEARINGS

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON CRIME

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY
HOUSE OP REPRESENTATIVES

ONE HUNDRED FOURTH CONGRESS

FIRST SESSION
ON

xi.Iv. 3

TAKING BACK OUR STREETS ACT OF 1995



JANUARY 19 AND 20, 1995



Serial No. 99




Printed for the use of the Committee on the Judiciary



U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
35-667 WASHINGTON : 1966



For sale by the U.S. Government Printing Office
Superintendent of Documents, Congressional Sales Office. Washington, DC 20402
ISBN 0-16-053925-0



TAKING BACK OUR STREETS ACT OF 1995



HEARINGS

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON CRIME

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY
HOUSE OP REPRESENTATIVES

ONE HUNDRED FOURTH CONGRESS

FIRST SESSION
ON

rx.Iv. 3

TAKING BACK OUR STREETS ACT OF 1995



JANUARY 19 AND 20, 1995



Serial No. 99




Printed for the use of the Committee on the Judiciary



COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY

HENRY J. HYDE, lUinois, Chairman

CARLOS J. MOORHEAD, California JOHN CONYERS, Jr., Michigan

F. JAMES SENSENBRENNER, Jr., PATRICIA SCHROEDER, Colorado

Wisconsin BARNEY FRANK, Massachusetts

BILL McCOLLUM, Florida CHARLES E. SCHUMER, New York

GEORGE W. GEKAS, Pennsylvania HOWARD L. BERMAN, California

HOWARD COBLE, North Carolina RICK BOUCHER, Virginia

LAMAR SMITH, Texas JOHN BRYANT, Texas

STEVEN SCHIFF, New Mexico JACK REED, Rhode Island

ELTON GALLEGLY, California JERROLD NADLER, New York

CHARLES T. CANADY, Florida ROBERT C. SCOTT, Virginia

BOB INGLIS, South Carolina MELVIN L. WATT, North Carolina

BOB GOODLATTE, Virginia XAVIER BECERRA, CaUfomia

STEPHEN E. BUYER, Indiana JOSE E. SERRANO, New York

MARTIN R. HOKE, Ohio ZOE LOFGREN, California

SONNY BONO, CaUfornia SHEILA JACKSON LEE, Texas
FRED HEINEMAN, North Carohna
ED BRYANT, Tennessee
STEVE CHABOT, Ohio
MICHAEL PATRICK FLANAGAN, IlUnois
BOB BARR, Georgia

Alan F. Coffey, Jr., General Counsel / Staff Director
Julian Epstein, Minority Staff Director



Subcommittee on Crime

BILL McCOLLUM, Florida, Chairman
STEVEN SCHIFF, New Mexico CHARLES E. SCHUMER, New York

STEPHEN E. BUYER, Indiana ROBERT C. SCOTT, Virginia

HOWARD COBLE, North Carolina ZOE LOFGREN, CaUfornia

FRED HEINEMAN, North Carolina SHEILA JACKSON LEE, Texas

ED BRYANT, Tennessee MELVIN L. WATT, North Carolina

STEVE CHABOT, Ohio
BOB BARR, Georgia

Paul J. McNulty, Chief Counsel

Glenn R. Schmitt, Counsel

Daniel J. Bryant, Assistant Counsel

Tom Dl\z, Minority Counsel

(II)



CONTENTS



HEARINGS DATES

Pftfl6

January 19, 1995 1

January 20, 1995 343

TEXT OF BILL

H.R. 3 4

OPENING STATEMENT

McCollum, Hon. Bill, a Representative in Congress from the State of Florida,

and chairman, Subcommittee on Crime 1

WITNESSES

Abraham, Lynne, district attorney, Philadelphia, PA 252

Ashe, Victor, mayor of Knoxville, TN, and president, U.S. Council of Mayors .. 195

Bolelyn, Susan, senior assistant attorney general. State of Georgia 309

Boyle, Patrick, detective, Philadelphia Police Department 246

Bronstein, Alvin J., director, Prison Project, American Civil Liberties Union ... 267

Click, Bennie R., chief of police, Dallas Police Department 479

Curtis, Lynn A., president, Milton S. Eisenhower Foundation 409

Dilulio, John J., Jr., professor of politics and public affairs, Princeton Univer-
sity, and director, Center for Public Management, Brookings Institution 483

Gebelein, Hon. Richard, on behalf of the National Association of Drug Court

Professionals 477

Gilmore, James S., HI, attorney general. State of Virginia 160

Goldstein, Gerald H., Esq., on behalf of the National Association of Criminal

Defense Lawyers 283

Larkin, Paul J., Esq., King & Spalding, Washington, DC 344

Lungren, Daniel E., attorney general. State of California 130

Macy, Robert H., district attorney. Seventh Judicial District, Oklahoma City,

OK, andpast president, National District Attorneys Association 205

McCann, E. Michael, chairperson. Section of Criminal Justice, on behalf of

the American Bar Association 369

Peed, Carl R., sheriff, Fairfax County, VA 214

Schmidt, John R., Associate Attorney General, Department of Justice 99

Yackle, Larry W., professor of law, Houston University School of Law 311

LETTERS, STATEMENTS, ETC., SUBMITTED FOR THE HEARING

Abraham, Lynne, district attorney, Philadelphia, PA: Prepared statement 257

Ashe, Victor, mayor of Knoxville, TN, and president, U.S. Council of Mayors:
Prepared statement 199

Boyle, Patrick, detective, Philadelphia Police Department: Prepared state-
ment 249

Click, Bennie R., chief of police, Dallas Police Department: F*repared state-
ment 483

Curtis, Lynn A., president, Milton S. Eisenhower Foundation:

Information concerning successful programs that have reduced crime 561

Prepared statement 412

Dilulio, John J., Jr., professor of politics and public affairs, Princeton Univer-
sity, and director, Center for Public Management, Brookings Institution:
Prepared statement 489

Letter to Sherille Ismail, from Lynn A. Curtis, the Milton S. Eisenhower
Foundation _ 1097

(III)



IV

Page

Gilmore, James S., Ill, attorney general, State of Virginia: Prepared state-
ment 163

Goldstein, Gerald H., Esq., on behalf of the National Association of Criminal
Defense Lawyers: Prepared statement 286

Heineman, Hon. Fred, a Representative in Congress from the State of North
Carolina: Prepared statement 95

Larkin, Paul J., Esq., King & Spalding, Washington, DC: Prepared statement 347

Lungren, Daniel E., attorney general, State of California: Prepared state-
ment 138

Macy, Robert H., district attorney, Seventh Judicial District, Oklahoma City,
Ok, and past president. National District Attorneys Association: Prepared
statement 209

McCann, E. Michael, chairperson, Section of Criminal Justice, on behalf of
the American Bar Association: Pi^pared statement 372

McCollum, Hon. Bill, a Representative in Congress from the State of Florida,
and chairman, Subcommittee on Crime: Summary of H.R. 3 and editor's
note 76

Peed, Carl R., sheriff, Fairfax County, VA: Prepared statement 217

Schmidt, John R., Associate Attorney General, Department of Justice: Pre-
pared statement 106

Scott, Hon. Robert C, a Representative in Congress from the State of Vir-
ginia: Prepared statement 90

Yackle, Larry W., professor of law, Houston University School of Law:

Letter dated February 14, 1995, to Chairman McCollum 337

FVepared statement 314

APPENDIX
Material submitted for the hearing 581



TAKING BACK OUR STREETS ACT OF 1995



THURSDAY, JANUARY 19, 1995

House of Representatives,

Subcommittee on Crime,
Committee on the Judiciary,

Washington, DC.
The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:25 a.m., in room
2141, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Bill McCoUum (chair-
man of the subcommittee) presiding.

Present: Representatives Bill McCoUum, Steven Schiff, Stephen
E. Buyer, Howard Coble, Fred Heineman, Ed Bryant of Tennessee,
Steve Chabot, Bob Barr, Charles E. Schumer, Robert C. Scott, Zoe
Lofgren, Sheila Jackson Lee, and Patricia Schroeder.

Also present: Representatives Melvin L. Watt and John Conyers,
Jr.

Staff present: Paul J. McNulty, chief counsel; Glenn R. Schmitt,
counsel; Daniel J. Bryant, assistant counsel; Aerin D. Dunkle, re-
search assistant; Audray Clement, clerk; and Tom Diaz, minority
counsel.

OPENING STATEMENT OF CHAIRMAN McCOLLUM

Mr. McCollum. This hearing is called to order.

This is the first hearing of the Crime Subcommittee of this new
Congress in 1995. And I am very pleased to be here today to be
the chairman of that subcommittee. And we have gone through our
opening opportunities to introduce folks during the full Judiciary
organizational meeting, and because we have a very large panel
today, we are not — set of panels, we are not going to go through
the process of introducing ourselves. I think we all know each
other.

We will go through the series of opportunities for opening state-
ments today. I would ask that the Members be brief and we will
get through the process. We may be interrupted a few times.

I notice that my ranking minority member is walking in, and I
am going to recognize him. I began the hearing so that we could
get under way with the opening statements.

This morning, we begin 2 days of hearings on issues related to
H.R. 3, the Taking Back Our Streets Act of 1995. This is a key part
of the Republican's Contract With America.

Last fall. House Republicans and scores of Republican candidates
to the House stood in front of the Capitol and pledged to the Amer-
ican people that a new crime bill, as well as nine other major legis-
lative initiatives, would be brought to the House floor in the first
100 days of the Republican-controlled Congress. Well, the American

(1)



people subsequently spoke loud and clear on November 8, and
today we begin the process of fulfilling one part of that promise.

The popularity of H.R, 3 rests in the fact that it combines tough
law enforcement, critically needed criminal justice reform, and
principles of good government into one relatively narrow package
of legislative proposals. As I see it, H.R. 3 accomplishes four impor-
tant goals.

First, it makes a major move to put deterrence back in our crimi-
nal justice system. We badly need to send the message that when
you do the crime you do the time.

H.R. 3 provides resources to States to build the prison beds nec-
essary to stop the revolving door and take off the streets the 6 per-
cent or so of the criminals who commit 70 percent of the violent
crimes and are serving only about a third of their sentences. In re-
turn, States must change their laws to require truth-in-sentencing
for repeat violent offenders to make sure that they serve 85 percent
of their sentences.

H.R. 3 sends a powerful swiftness and certainty of punishment
message to those who use guns in the commission of a crime. The
minimum mandatory sentences of 5, 10, and 20 years for carrying,
using, or discharging a gun in the commission of a serious violent
or drug-related crime, whether State or Federal, could be the most
significant new deterrent put into Federal law in years. And the re-
form of the habeas corpus law to end the seemingly endless appeals
of death row inmates will in my judgment make the death penalty
more likely to be a deterrent.

Second, H.R. 3 gets the Federal Government out of the way of
State and local law enforcement, the frontlines of the war against
crime. It does this by curtailing endless appeals by State death row
inmates who currently use Federal law to delay justice for years
and years. It restricts the ability of Federal judges to seize control
of local jails and State prisons as a result of lawsuits filed by pris-
oners. And it repeals dozens of Federal grant programs that rep-
resent a "Washington knows best" approach to public safety.

Third, H.R. 3 accomplishes the goal of assisting State and local
governments in the fight against crime where such assistance is
most needed by calling for $10 billion in block grants to units of
local government for the purpose of reducing crime and improving
public safety. Local governments are free to use these funds in
whatever manner they choose, including the hiring of more police
and crime prevention.

The bill authorizes more than $10 billion for building, expanding,
or operating State prisons, recognizing that the greatest need for
financial assistance is experienced in those States that are getting
tough with violent crime by cutting back on early parole, H.R. 3
prioritizes fund distribution to truth-in-sentencing States, meaning
States that require violent repeat criminals to serve 85 percent of
their sentences.

Finally, that H.R. 3 addresses the continuing problem of criminal
alien deportation by strengthening procedures for deporting such
criminals and freeing up desperately needed State prison beds.

The fourth goal achieved by H.R. 3 is strengthening Federal law
enforcement by providing a good faith exception for the exclusion-
ary rule in cases where Federal law enforcement officers seized evi-



dence under circumstances that Federal judges later deem to be
reasonable and in good faith, more criminal offenders will be held
accountable for their crimes. Moreover, H.R. 3 includes tough pen-
alties for violent, gun-wielding criminals. The message sent by this
bill is clear, that firearm violence anjrwhere in America will not be
tolerated.

H.R. 3 is not perfect, and I expect many of our witnesses today
and tomorrow will offer suggestions for improving the bill. I wel-
come such comments, but believe the bill fundamentally addresses
many of the concerns and fears about violent crime in America.

I had the privilege of visiting over 90 congressional districts in
1994. I spoke with hundreds of concerned citizens and law enforce-
ment officers. Everywhere I went, people told me the same thing.
We know what works best, not Washington. Americans want the
criminal justice system to work. They want scarce tax dollars to
work to hold violent criminals accountable and when you do the
crime that you do the time. And they told me that it definitely is
not in the law today.

I am confident that this Congress, beginning with this sub-
committee, will fulfill these expectations. Today is just the first
step in developing effective crime legislation in this subcommittee.
I look forward to many more hearings and many more opportuni-
ties to address this problem in the coming months.

[The bill, H.R. 3, the summary, and editor's note, follow:!



104th congress
1st Session



H.R.3



To control crime.



IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATR^S

Jantary 4, 1995

Mr. McCoLLUM. Mr. Canady, Mr. Barr, and Mr. Brewster (for them-
selves, Mr. Allard, Mr. Armey, Mr. Bachus, Mr. Baker of California,
Mr. Ballenger, Mr. Bartlett of Man-land, Mr. Barton of Texas,
Mr. Biurakis, Mr. BuLEY, Mr. Blute, Mr. Boxo, Mr. Binning of
Kentnckj', Mr. Burr, Mr. Callahan. Mr. CAL^•ERT, Mr. Camp, Mr.
Christensen, Mr. Chrysler, Mr. Clinger, Mr. Coburn, Mr.
COOLEY, Mr. Cremeans, Mrs. CrBLX, Mr. Dams, Mr. Doouttle. Mr.
DORNAN. Ms. Dunn, Mr. Engush of Pennsylvania. Mr. EMERSON, Mr.
EwiNG, Mr. En'erett, Mr. Flanagan, Mr. Foley, Mr. Forbes, Mrs.
Fo%\'LER, Mr. Fox, Mr. Frisa, Mr. Ganske, Mr. Gilchrest, Mr. Oil-
man, Mr. GooDLATTE, Mr. Gordon, Mr. Goss, Mr. Green"\vood, Mr.
Hancock, Mr. Hastert, Mr. Hastings of Washington. Mr.
HA"i"VVORTH, Mr. Hein'e>l\n, Mr. Herger, Mr. Hilleary, Mr. Hobson,
Mr. Hoke, Mr. Hostettler, Mr. Hutchinson. Mr. Ingus of South
Carolina, Mr. ISTOOK. Mr. Jones, Mr. KiM, Mr. Kingston. Mr.
Knollen-berg, Mr. LaHood. Mr. L.\rgent. Mr. Latham, Mr.
LaTourette, Mr. Lewis of Kentuckj-, Mr. Lightfoot, Mr. Linder,
Mr. McHuGH, Mr. McLntosh, Mr. Mica. Mr. Miller of Florida. Ms.
MouNARi, Mrs. Myrick, Mr. XussLE, Mr. OxLEY, Mr. Packard, Mr.
Pombo, Mr. QuiNN, Mr. Radaxomch, Mr. RiGGS, Mr. Rohrabacher,
Mr. Roth, Mr. Royce, Mr. Saxton, Mr. Sensenbrenn-er. Mr.
Shadegg, Mr. Shaw, Mr. Smith of Michigan, Mr. Smith of Texas, Mr.
Solomon, Mr. Stearns, Mr. Stock>l\n, Mr. Stump, Mr. Tate, Mr.
Taylor of North Carohna, Mr. Thorn^berry, Mr. Tl\hrt, Mrs.
Waldholtz, Mr. WA.MP, Mr. W'eldon of Pennsylvania. Mr. Weller,
Mr. Wicker, Mr. Zimmer, Mr. Crapo, Mr. Kolbe. Mr. Paxon. Mr.
Young of Florida. Mr. Weldon of Florida. Mr. Combest. Mr. COBLE.
Mr. Ehruch, Mrs. MEYERS of Kansas, and Mr. Hunter) introduced
the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary



2

A BILL

To control crime.

1 Be it enacted by the Henate and House of Represe^ata-

2 tives of the United States ofAraerUyi in Co'ogress asse-rabled,

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS.

4 (a) Short Title. — This Act umy F>e cited as the

5 "Taking Back Our Streets Act of 1995".

6 (ij) Table of Contents. — The table of contents is

7 as follows:

Set. 1 . Short title; table of ewiteute.

title I— EFFBCrrVE DEATH PENALTY

Subtitle A — Habeas Corpas BeCona

Chapteb 1 — Poer Convktion PETiTioNb: Genebal Habeas Caiun:8
Repokm

See. 101. Period (^ limhatioii for fiiiug writ of habeas corpus foQowiu^ final
jadgBeit of a Staur court.

See. 102. AutboriQr of appeUate judjees to issue eertifieatee of probable eaoae
for appeal in habeas corpus and Federal eoliateral relief pro-
eeediugs.

Sec. 103. Coufomuug iiiw imIbm ii< to the ruks of appeBate procedure.

See. 104. Diseretioti to deny habeas corpus appfieataon despite failure to ex-
haust State remedies

See. 105. Period of limjtattou for Federal prisooers filing for eofiateni Hf dy.

Chapteb 2 — Special Pbocedv^s roB Cckxatekal Pbocebmmqs nc
Capital Casies

See. 106. Death petiah>' litt^tioci procedures.

Chapteb 3 — ^Fi.vdlng fob Litigatw.v of Fedeeal Habeas Coepts
Petitionk in Capital Cakes

See. 107. Funding for death penatey pn mtatkmm

Subtitle B — Federal Death Peuah>- Proeeduree Befions

See 111. Federal death poaalrt' proeednres reform.

TITLE JJ— DETEPJaNG GUN CBIME6



•mis m



Sec. 201. Mandatory prison terms for use, possession, or carrying of a firearm
or destructive device during a State crime of violence or State
drug trafficking crime.

TITLE III— MANDATORY VICTIM RESTITUTION

Sec. 301. Mandatory restitution and other provisions.

TITLE IV— LAW ENFORCEMENT BLOCK GRANTS

Sec. 401. Block grant program.

TITLE V— TRUTH IN SENTENCING GRANTS

See. 501. Truth in sentencing grant program.

TITLE VI— EXCLUSIONARY RULE REFORM

Sec. 601. Admissibility of certain evidence.

TITLE VII— STOPPING ABUSIVE PRISONER LAWSUITS

Sec. 701. Exliaustion requirement.

Sec. 702. Frivolous actions.

Sec. 703. Modification of required miiiimum standards.

Sec. 704. Proceedings in forma pauperis.

TITLE VIII— FURTHER STREAMLINING DEPORTATION OF
■ CRIMINAL ALIENS

Sec. 801. Additional expansion of definition of aggravated felony.

Sec. 802. Deportation procedures for certain criminal aliens who are not per-
manent residents.

Sec. 803. Restricting defenses to deportation for certain criminal aliens.

Sec. 804. Limitation on collateral attacks on underlying deportation order.

Sec. 805. Criminal alien tracking center.

Sec. 806. Miscellaneous provisions.

Sec. 807. Construction of expedited deportation requirements.

TITLE IX— AMENDMENTS TO VIOLENT CRIME CONTROL AND
LAW ENFORCEMENT ACT

Sec. 901. Deletion or replacement of programs.



•HR 3 IH



4

1 TITLE I— EFFECTIVE DEATH

2 PENALTY

3 Subtitle A — Habeas Corpus Reform

4 CHAPTER 1— POST CONVICTION PETI-

5 TIONS: GENERAL HABEAS CORPUS RE-

6 FORM

7 SEC. 101. PERIOD OF LIMITATION FOR FILING WRIT OF

8 HABEAS CORPUS FOLLOWING FINAL JUDG-

9 MENT OF A STATE COURT.

10 Section 2244 of title 28, United States Code, is

1 1 amended by adding at the end the following:

12 "(d) A one-year period of limitation shall apply to an

13 application for a writ of habeas corpus by a person in cus-

14 tody pursuant to the judgment of a State court. The limi-

15 tation period shall run from the latest of the following

16 times:

17 "(1) The time at which State remedies are ex-

18 hausted.

19 "(2) The time at which the impediment to filing

20 an apphcation created by State action in violation of

21 the Constitution or laws of the United States is re-

22 moved, where the apphcant was prevented from fil-

23 ing by such State action.

24 "(3) The time at which the Federal right as-

25 serted was initially recognized by the Supreme

•HR 3 IH



8



5

1 Court, where the right has been newly recognized by

2 the Court and is retroactively applicable.

3 "(4) The time at which the factual predicate of

4 the claim or claims presented could have been dis-

5 covered through the exercise of reasonable dili-

6 gence.".

7 SEC. 102. AUTHORITY OF APPELLATE JUDGES TO ISSUE

8 CERTIFICATES OF PROBABLE CAUSE FOR

9 APPEAL IN HABEAS CORPUS AND FEDERAL

10 COLLATERAL RELIEF PROCEEDINGS.

11 Section 2253 of title 28, United States Code, is

12 amended to read as follows:

13 ''§2253. Appeal

14 "(a) In a habeas corpus proceeding or a proceeding

15 under section 2255 of this title before a circuit or district

16 judge, the final order shall be subject to review, on appeal,

17 by the court of appeals for the circuit where the proceed-

18 ingishad.

19 "(b) There shall be no right of appeal from such an

20 order in a proceeding to test the validity of a warrant to

21 remove, to another district or place for commitment or

22 trial, a person charged with a criminal offense against the

23 United States, or to test the validity of his detention pend-

24 ing removal proceedings.



•HR 3 IH



6

1 "(e) An appeal may not be taken to the court of ap-

2 peals from the final order in a habeas corpus proceeding

3 where the detention complained of arises out of process

4 issued by a State court, or from the final order in a pro-

5 ceeding under section 2255 of this title, unless a circuit

6 justice or judge issues a certificate of probable cause. A

7 certificate of probable cause may only issue if the peti-

8 tioner has made a substantial showing of the denial of a

9 Federal right. The certificate of probable cause must indi-

10 cate which specific issue or issues satisfy this standard.".

11 SEC. 103. CONFORMING AMENDMENT TO THE RULES OF

12 APPELLATE PROCEDURE.

13 Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 22 is amended

14 to read as follows:

15 "RULE 22

16 "habeas corpus and section 2255 PROCEEDINGS

17 "(a) Application for an Original Writ op Ha-

18 BEAS Corpus. — An application for a writ of habeas cor-

19 pus shall be made to the appropriate district court. If ap-

20 phcation is made to a circuit judge, the appheation will

21 ordinarily be transferred to the appropriate district court.

22 If an appheation is made to or transferred to the district

23 court and denied, renewal of the application before a cir-

24 cuit judge is not favored; the proper remedy is by appeal



•HR 3 m



10

7

1 to the court of appeals from the order of the district court

2 denying the writ.

3 "(b) Necessity of Certificate of Probable

4 Cause for Appeal. — In a habeas corpus proceeding in

5 which the detention complained of arises out of process

6 issued by a State court, and in a motion proceeding pursu-

7 ant to section 2255 of title 28, United States Code, an

8 appeal by the applicant or movant may not proceed unless

9 a circuit judge issues a certificate of probable cause. If

10 a request for a certificate of probable cause is addressed

11 to the court of appeals, it shall be deemed addressed to

12 the judges thereof and shall be considered by a circuit

1 3 judge or judges as the court deems appropriate. If no ex-

14 press request for a certificate is filed, the notice of appeal

15 shall be deemed to constitute a request addressed to the

16 judges of the court of appeals. If an appeal is taken by

17 a State or the Government or its representative, a certifi-

18 cate of probable cause is not required.".

19 SEC. 104. DISCRETION TO DENY HABEAS CORPUS APPLICA-

20 TION DESPITE FAILURE TO EXHAUST STATE

21 REMEDIES.

22 Section 2254(b) of title 28, United State Code, is

23 amended to read as follows:

24 "(b) An application for a writ of habeas corpus in

25 behalf of a person in custody pursuant to the judgment

•HR3 IH



11

8

1 of a State court shall not be granted unless it appears

2 that the applicant has exhausted the remedies available

3 in the courts of the State, or that there is either an ab-

4 sence of available State corrective process or the existence

5 of circumstances rendering such process ineffective to pro-

6 tect the rights of the applicant. An application may be

7 denied on the merits notwithstanding the failure of the

8 applicant to exhaust the remedies available in the courts

9 of the State.".

10 SEC. 105. PERIOD OF LIMITATION FOR FEDERAL PRIS-

1 1 ONERS FILING FOR COLLATERAL REMEDY.

12 Section 2255 of title 28, United States Code, is

13 amended by striking the second paragraph and the penul-

14 timate paragraph thereof, and by adding at the end the

15 following new paragraphs:

16 "A two-year period of hmitation shall apply to a mo-

17 tion under this section. The limitation period shall run

1 8 from the latest of the following times:

19 "(1) The time at which the judgment of convic-

20 tion becomes final.

21 "(2) The time at which the impediment to mak-

22 ing a motion created by governmental action in vio-

23 lation of the Constitution or laws of the United



Online LibraryUnited States. Congress. House. Committee on the JTaking Back Our Streets Act of 1995 : hearings before the Subcommittee on Crime of the Committee on the Judiciary, House of Representatives, One Hundred Fourth Congress, first session, on H.R. 3 ... January 19 and 20, 1995 → online text (page 1 of 51)