Mr. Chairman, first of all, I think Members should understand that Hyde has basically returned us to existing law, which is a mess. I mean, if anything, habeas corpus has been substantially abused in this country, and I think most Members want to reform it. Our colleague from Florida indicated that there are no differences between what is in the committee bill and Derrick, and that is nonsense. The Derrick amendment makes four major important changes. First of all, insofar as new rules, the Derrick amendment prohibits any retroactivity for new rules. That means that any new rules that come out of the Supreme Court after the defendant was convicted cannot be raised in a habeas corpus proceeding, period. Second, it absolutely prohibits defendants from raising claims in Federal court that were not raised in State courts. That is a major change over what is in the committee bill which I support. Third, it eliminates multiple petitions, one bite at the apple, with the exception of where the claim goes to the defendant's guilt or legal eligibility for the death sentence. I would like to hear from those who would not want to permit that to be raised if it goes to the defendant's guilt. Finally, it says the courts, the States, have 1 year to implement procedures for giving defendants competent counsel. Now, if you want to reform habeas corpus, you provide competent counsel.
Editor's note · Context
Discussing the changes proposed in the Derrick amendment to habeas corpus law.
Share
More from William Hughes
I support the death penalty, as most of my colleagues know, where I believe it can be constitutionally imposed... a jury can consider, as one of the aggravating factors, the heinous nature of the offense, cruel nature of the offense, or…
I can tell the gentleman there are lots of reasons why I would not want to identify as a prosecutor the subjects or targets of the investigation for a lot of reasons. When you have not completed the investigations, sometimes subjects…
I rise in opposition to all of the proposed constitutional amendments dealing with a balanced budget. It is important that we do not frame this debate in terms of whether or not a balanced budget is a worthy goal--of course it is. To…
How can anybody be opposed to developing a comprehensive plan to manage precious Federal resources or State resources? I do not know how my colleague, who is a dear friend of mine, from New Mexico can argue that there is something…





