Writs of Habeas Corpus

The government cannot imprison people outside the bounds of the law. A habeas corpus petition calls attention to violations of constitutional rights, including due process protections.

This article explains the origins of the writ of habeas corpus, the process for filing, and the limitations on filing. If you need urgent help for someone in custody, talk to a criminal defense lawyer. They can act fast to stop illegal treatment. 

What Is a Writ of Habeas Corpus?

A habeas corpus petition is a document that alleges illegal imprisonment of a person. It urges the court to offer a remedy if the judge agrees with this claim. This writ reflects the national commitment to freedom and justice for all people, including prisoners.

In many countries, authorities may incarcerate someone for months or years without charging them. Those imprisoned have no legal means to protest or challenge the imprisonment. Many prisoners use a writ to challenge the legality of their confinement.

The framers of the United States Constitution wanted to prohibit this kind of abuse of power in the United States. Therefore, they included a specific clause in the U.S. Constitution to safeguard the right, known as habeas corpus.

Habeas corpus has roots in English common law, tracing back to 1215. The 39th clause of the Magna Carta, signed by King John, provided that “no man shall be arrested or imprisoned … except by the lawful judgment of his peers and by the law of the land.” In Latin, it translates to “you should have the body.”

Filing a Writ of Habeas Corpus

The rules for filing a federal writ of habeas corpus are found in the U.S. Code. In general, a person cannot file a writ of habeas corpus unless they can demonstrate that the government has detained them. State prisoners cannot file a federal writ unless they have already exhausted all available state remedies. A federal court will likely dismiss the writ if the petitioner has not done so.

Often, the court holds a hearing on the matter. The inmate and the government may present evidence during the hearing questioning whether a legal basis exists for jailing the person. The court may also issue and enforce subpoenas to obtain additional evidence.

What Happens if a Court Grants a Writ of Habeas Corpus?

There are several types of habeas relief available. Depending on what the evidence reveals, the judge may grant the inmate post-conviction relief, such as:

• An immediate release from prison
• A reduction of their sentence
• An order halting the illegal conditions of confinement
• A declaration of rights

The type of habeas relief granted depends on the evidence presented during the habeas hearing.

Writs of Habeas Corpus vs. Appeals

Habeas corpus differs from the right of direct appeal. In a criminal appeal, defendants may challenge their criminal convictions or sentences. The appellate court reviews the district court’s rulings. The defendant may file another appeal to a higher court, such as their state’s supreme court or the U.S. Supreme Court.

A defendant may use the appeals process to challenge their lower court conviction for the following reasons, among others: 

• Prosecutorial misconduct at the trial court level
• Ineffective assistance of counsel during their trial
• An error of law by the trial judge, such as misinterpreting a federal law or the relevant case law, which may entitle them to a new trial
• The prosecution failed to adhere to the federal or state code of criminal procedure

By contrast, habeas corpus provides a separate avenue for challenging imprisonment. It’s often utilized by prisoners after their challenge to the court of appeals fails. Habeas corpus often serves as a last resort for inmates who insist that the government has unjustly imprisoned them.

Writs of Habeas Corpus in Immigration Cases

Habeas corpus petitions can play a crucial role in challenging immigration detention, which is a civil rather than a criminal matter. Individuals facing deportation or being held by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) may file habeas petitions when detention becomes unreasonably prolonged or when removal is not reasonably foreseeable.

The rules governing your detention depend on the stage of the deportation process you are in. If immigration authorities haven’t yet decided whether to deport you, federal law allows you to be held while your case is pending. The law allows the government to release you on a bond of at least $1,500 or conditional parole. However, certain categories of people are subject to mandatory detention without bond.

If authorities have already issued a final order to remove you, the law requires the government to remove you from the United States within 90 days. During the removal period, the attorney general can order your detention.

The U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Zadvydas v. Davis established critical protections against indefinite detention. This case involves two lawful permanent residents who remained in custody after the 90-day removal period had ended. They were detained because no country would accept them. The Supreme Court of the United States ruled that immigration law does not allow indefinite detention simply because deportation becomes difficult. Any detention made after the removal period should be reasonably necessary in carrying out the deportation order.

The Court also established the six-month benchmark with this ruling. After the six-month detention period, a detainee can challenge continued detention. The government must then show that the pending removal is realistic.

If you are facing immigration detention or deportation, it is important to consult an immigration attorney. They can provide you with legal advice to protect your rights.

Limitations on Habeas Corpus

All prisoners may file a petition for a writ of habeas corpus. As such, the judicial branch receives a flood of habeas corpus petitions each year, including some prepared by inmates without the assistance of a lawyer. Strict procedures govern which petitions judges may consider. Rules bar inmates from repetitively filing petitions about the same matter.

Both state and federal courts may consider habeas corpus petitions. Federal prisoners typically file their petitions in federal district courts, whereas state prisoners must exhaust their state remedies before seeking federal habeas relief. Federal courts sometimes find that a state has unjustly imprisoned someone and order their release. Congress has imposed restrictions on federal courts’ authority to overrule state courts in this manner.

Constitutional protections for habeas corpus are found in Article I of the U.S. Constitution. This law states that Congress cannot suspend the writ of habeas corpus except in cases of rebellion, invasion, or when the public safety requires it. During the Civil War, President Lincoln suspended the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus without the authorization of Congress to detain Confederate sympathizers, which sparked constitutional debate. This historical tension highlights the delicate balance between national security and liberty that the judicial branch continues to navigate today.

The Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (AEDPA)

Congress passed the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (AEDPA), a federal statute, in the aftermath of 1995’s Oklahoma City bombing. The AEDPA and the Prison Litigation Reform Act (PLRA) sought to reduce the number of habeas corpus petitions and civil rights complaints in federal court, respectively.

Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act

The AEDPA narrowed a defendant’s ability to file a habeas corpus petition. The restrictions provide the legal authority for federal courts to review state court decisions in habeas cases. Among others, it sets out the following rules:

• If a state court decided the defendant’s case on the merits, a federal court would not grant a writ of habeas corpus unless the state court’s decision was contrary to the law
• A federal court reviewing a habeas corpus petition presumes that the state court’s decisions regarding factual issues are correct, placing the onus on the defendant to rebut the presumption by clear and convincing evidence
• A person filing a habeas corpus petition in federal court must exhaust all state remedies before doing so

Other conditions may apply.

Time Limits for Habeas Corpus

The AEDPA imposes a one-year time limit from the defendant’s judgment date to file a habeas corpus petition, although other dates may apply. This statute of limitations varies from state to state.

Research indicates that the AEDPA’s goal of reducing the number of petitions filed in federal court has not been effective. The total number of filings doubled from 1982 to 2013. Given the increase in the prison population during that time, the number of federal habeas corpus petitions per inmate may be more accurate than the total number of petitions filed. Research indicates that the number of habeas corpus petitions filed per prisoner has remained about the same.

Prison Litigation Reform Act

Under the PLRA, inmates contesting conditions generally must first attempt to resolve the matter through available grievance procedures. This allows corrections officials an opportunity to remedy problems before litigation.

Get Help To Challenge Incarceration or Detention

If you believe the government has illegally imprisoned you and want to file a writ of habeas corpus, consider speaking with a criminal defense lawyer. Criminal defense attorneys are criminal law experts and can provide advice about your criminal case. An experienced criminal defense attorney can help you achieve the best outcome possible.