Blog
Federal Habeas Corpus Relief After Conviction: An Attorney’s Guide
Federal Habeas Corpus Relief After Conviction: An Attorney’s Guide
So you or your client was convicted of a crime and you want to challenge the conviction or sentence through a federal habeas corpus petition. Don’t worry, this guide will walk you through the basics of federal habeas so you can get the relief you’re looking for. I’ll explain what habeas corpus is, when you can file a petition, what deadlines apply, and the general requirements for relief. This isn’t meant to be an exhaustive guide to habeas, but it should give you a good starting point. Let’s get to it!
What is Habeas Corpus?
Habeas corpus, which literally means “you have the body,” is a legal action that allows federal courts to examine the legality of someone’s detention. It originates from the Constitution, which prohibits suspending habeas except during times of rebellion or invasion. The idea is that the government can’t just lock someone up forever without judicial review. Through a habeas petition, the court reviews whether the detention violates federal laws or the Constitution.
For people convicted of crimes, habeas corpus allows federal courts to review state court convictions and sentences. This review is fairly limited though. Basically the federal court examines whether the state court’s decision involved an “unreasonable application” of clearly established federal law as determined by the U.S. Supreme Court. We’ll talk more about the standard of review later.
When Can You File a Federal Habeas Petition?
You can file a federal habeas petition after you’ve exhausted your remedies in state court. This includes direct appeals and state post-conviction proceedings. You must raise the claims in your habeas petition first in state court to give them a chance to review the issues. Once you’ve finished with state proceedings, you can file a federal habeas petition within the filing deadline.
Filing Deadline
There is a 1-year deadline for filing a federal habeas petition. The one year starts running from the latest of:
- The date your conviction became final after direct appeal
- The date a government-created impediment to filing was removed
- The date the constitutional right you’re asserting was initially recognized by the U.S. Supreme Court, if it’s a new right
- The date new facts supporting your claim could have been discovered through diligence
This deadline is strict but allows tolling (pausing) under certain circumstances. For example, the one-year deadline is tolled while a properly filed application for state post-conviction review is pending. So if you properly file for state post-conviction relief, that will pause the habeas deadline. The clock starts again when state proceedings end. There are other tolling provisions too, like for mental incompetence. But you can’t count on tolling – file ASAP once state proceedings end.
Exhaustion Requirement
Before coming to federal court, you must exhaust all available state court remedies for the claims in your habeas petition. As mentioned above, this includes direct appeals and state post-conviction proceedings. The state courts must have a fair opportunity to review the claims and provide any relief before you can bring them in federal court.
There are exceptions where you don’t have to exhaust state remedies before filing for federal habeas. For example, if state procedures are unavailable or would be futile. But you can’t avoid the exhaustion requirement just because you failed to properly assert your claims in state court. Get them reviewed there first.
Requirements for Habeas Relief
To get relief on a federal habeas claim, you must show that the state court’s decision was:
- Contrary to clearly established federal law, or
- Involved an unreasonable application of clearly established federal law
This is called the “AEDPA deference” standard, based on the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act. It’s a high bar because federal courts have to defer a lot to state court decisions.
Let’s break the standard down. For a decision to be “contrary to” federal law, the state court must have arrived at a conclusion opposite to U.S. Supreme Court precedent on a question of law. Or the state court must have faced facts that are materially indistinguishable from relevant Supreme Court precedent but arrived at the opposite result.
For an “unreasonable application” of federal law, the state court must have identified the correct governing legal principle but unreasonably applied it to the facts. This requires more than just an incorrect decision – it must be objectively unreasonable, meaning no fairminded jurist could agree with the state court’s decision.
The federal court reviewing the habeas petition can only look at the record that was before the state court. They apply the AEDPA deference standard to the state court’s decision, not the underlying claim itself. So it’s really tough to win on federal habeas review.
Common Habeas Claims
While habeas petitions can involve all kinds of issues, some common claims include:
- Ineffective assistance of counsel – Your lawyer was deficient and it impacted the case outcome. See ineffective assistance of counsel.
- Prosecutorial misconduct – The prosecutor engaged in improper conduct that violated your rights. See prosecutorial misconduct.
- Actual innocence – You have new evidence showing you are factually innocent of the crime. See actual innocence.
- Due process violations – The state failed to provide adequate due process protections guaranteed by the Constitution. See due process.
The key is identifying a federal constitutional issue with the state court conviction or sentence. Not all errors or bad lawyering rise to the level of a constitutional violation. The state court’s decision must be objectively unreasonable under federal law.
Evidentiary Hearings
Sometimes federal courts hold evidentiary hearings in habeas cases to take testimony and evidence related to the claims. This can happen if the petitioner didn’t get a full and fair hearing in state court and meets other requirements. But evidentiary hearings are rare, especially under AEDPA’s deferential standard. Usually the court just looks at the record from state proceedings.
Habeas Relief
If the federal court grants habeas relief, the typical remedy is to order the state to release the petitioner or retry the case within a certain timeframe (like 90 days). The court tailors the relief to fix the constitutional defect. Sometimes this means ordering a new sentencing hearing only. Other times it could mean barring certain evidence at a retrial or directing the state not to seek the death penalty again.
The court tries to give the minimum relief needed while still addressing the constitutional violation. The goal is to put the petitioner in the position they would have been in if the violation never happened. Full release or dismissal of charges is rare. But it can happen in extreme cases like actual innocence.
Appeals
A petitioner can appeal if the federal district court denies habeas relief. The appeal goes to the circuit court of appeals for that geographic region. For example, a habeas case from California would go to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. The appellate court reviews the district court’s decision de novo for issues of law, but gives deference to factual findings unless they are clearly erroneous.
If the circuit court affirms the denial of habeas, the petitioner can ask the U.S. Supreme Court to review the case through a petition for certiorari. However, Supreme Court review is discretionary. They agree to hear only a small fraction of cases each year. Unless there is a split between circuit courts on an important federal question, don’t count on getting to the Supreme Court.
Conclusion
Federal habeas corpus provides an important check on unconstitutional convictions and sentences. But it is challenging to win relief under the deferential AEDPA standard. You must show the state court’s decision was objectively unreasonable on the federal issues. And procedural obstacles like exhaustion and filing deadlines often derail petitions before reaching the merits. But navigating these complexities is worth it in egregious cases of injustice. With smart and persistent lawyering, federal habeas corpus can still provide a critical path to freedom.