Bill Text: CT HB06439 | 2011 | General Assembly | Comm Sub
Bill Title: An Act Concerning Habeas Corpus Reform.
Spectrum: Committee Bill
Status: (Introduced - Dead) 2011-05-02 - File Number 679 [HB06439 Detail]
Download: Connecticut-2011-HB06439-Comm_Sub.html
General Assembly |
||
January Session, 2011 |
*_____HB06439JUD___041511____* |
AN ACT CONCERNING HABEAS CORPUS REFORM.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives in General Assembly convened:
Section 1. (NEW) (Effective October 1, 2011) The provisions of sections 2 to 5, inclusive, of this act apply to any application for a writ of habeas corpus filed on or after the effective date of this section that is brought by or on behalf of a person who (1) claims to be illegally confined or deprived of his or her liberty as a result of a conviction of an offense, as defined in section 53a-24 of the general statutes, or a motor vehicle violation for which a term of imprisonment may be imposed, and is challenging the validity of the conviction or sentence imposed, or (2) claims to be illegally confined or deprived of his or her liberty as a result of a commitment to the jurisdiction of the Psychiatric Security Review Board after a finding that the person was not guilty by reason of mental disease or defect pursuant to section 53a-13 of the general statutes and is challenging the validity of the commitment.
Sec. 2. (NEW) (Effective October 1, 2011) Except for the remedies of appeal, petition for a new trial, sentence review in accordance with section 51-196 of the general statutes or sentence reduction or discharge in accordance with section 53a-39 of the general statutes and the authority of the sentencing court at common law to correct an illegal sentence, the remedy of habeas corpus as provided in sections 1 to 5, inclusive, of this act shall be used exclusively in lieu of all common law, statutory or other remedies available prior to the effective date of this section for challenging the validity of a conviction, sentence or commitment.
Sec. 3. (NEW) (Effective October 1, 2011) (a) A claim for relief raised in an application for a writ of habeas corpus, or in an amended application, shall be barred and no court may decide the claim if:
(1) It was raised and decided, either on the merits or on procedural grounds, in any earlier proceeding; or
(2) It could have been raised but was not raised:
(A) At any time prior to the imposition of sentence in the proceeding that resulted in the applicant's conviction, sentence or commitment;
(B) In a direct appeal from the proceeding that resulted in the applicant's conviction, sentence or commitment; or
(C) In a previous habeas corpus proceeding challenging the same conviction, sentence or commitment.
(b) Notwithstanding the provisions of subsection (a) of this section, a court may hear a claim if:
(1) The applicant sets forth sufficient facts which, when viewed in a light most favorable to the applicant, demonstrate good cause for his or her failure to raise the specific claim in the earlier proceedings and actual prejudice resulting from the impropriety claimed in the application. For purposes of this subdivision, an applicant demonstrates good cause by identifying an objective factor external to the defense that impeded his or her ability to raise the specific claim during the earlier proceedings or demonstrating that the claim for relief is based upon a new interpretation of federal or state constitutional law by either the Supreme Court of the United States or the Supreme Court of this state that was previously unavailable and is retroactively applicable to cases on collateral review; or
(2) The applicant alleges the existence of newly discovered evidence that could not have been discovered previously by the exercise of due diligence by the applicant or the applicant's counsel and would establish that the applicant is actually innocent of the offense or offenses for which the applicant was convicted or committed. For purposes of this subdivision, "actually innocent" means that the applicant did not engage in the conduct for which he or she was convicted or committed, engage in conduct amounting to any lesser included offense thereof or commit any other offense or motor vehicle violation arising out of or reasonably connected to the facts supporting the information upon which the applicant was convicted or committed.
Sec. 4. (NEW) (Effective October 1, 2011) (a) The provisions of section 51-296 of the general statutes shall not apply in a proceeding initiated by the filing of a second or subsequent application for a writ of habeas corpus. The court before which a second or subsequent application is pending may, if it determines that the grounds for relief raised in the application are not frivolous and not procedurally barred, that the interests of justice will be furthered and, after investigation by the public defender or his or her office, that the applicant is indigent as defined under chapter 887 of the general statutes, designate a public defender, assistant public defender or deputy assistant public defender or appoint counsel from the trial list established under section 51-291 of the general statutes, to represent such indigent applicant.
(b) The ineffective assistance of any counsel who represented the applicant in an earlier habeas corpus proceeding shall not be a ground for relief in a second or subsequent application.
(c) For the purposes of this section, "a second or subsequent application" means an application for a writ of habeas corpus filed after a first application for a writ of habeas corpus is filed.
Sec. 5. (NEW) (Effective October 1, 2011) (a) Prior to scheduling an evidentiary hearing on an application brought pursuant to sections 1 to 4, inclusive, of this act, the court shall determine that any factual assertion that provides the predicate for a claim of relief brought pursuant to sections 1 to 4, inclusive, of this act is supported by an affidavit or certification from the declarant from which a court could determine that the evidence supporting the fact would be admissible in a hearing on the application.
(b) An applicant shall be entitled to a hearing on an application filed pursuant to sections 1 to 4, inclusive, of this act only upon an establishment of a prima facie case in support of the application and a determination by the court that there are material issues of disputed fact that cannot be resolved by reference to the existing record and that an evidentiary hearing is necessary to resolve the claim or claims for relief. To establish a prima facie case for a claim or claims, an applicant must plead sufficient facts supported pursuant to subsection (a) of this section to demonstrate a reasonable likelihood that, if the facts are viewed in a light most favorable to the applicant, the claim or claims will succeed on the merits.
(c) A court shall not grant an evidentiary hearing (1) if such a hearing will not aid in the court's analysis of the applicant's claim or claims for relief, (2) if the allegations of the application are vague, conclusory or speculative, or (3) for the purpose of permitting an applicant to investigate whether additional claims for relief exist for which the applicant has not demonstrated a reasonable likelihood of success as required by this section.
This act shall take effect as follows and shall amend the following sections: | ||
Section 1 |
October 1, 2011 |
New section |
Sec. 2 |
October 1, 2011 |
New section |
Sec. 3 |
October 1, 2011 |
New section |
Sec. 4 |
October 1, 2011 |
New section |
Sec. 5 |
October 1, 2011 |
New section |
JUD |
Joint Favorable Subst. |