Habeas Corpus Litigation in United States District Courts: An Empirical Study, 2000-2006

The purpose of the Habeas Corpus Litigation in United States District Courts: An Empirical Study, 2007 is to provide empirical information about habeas corpus cases filed by state prisoners in United States District Courts under the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (AEDPA). The writ of habeas corpus is a remedy regulated by statute and available in federal court to persons "in custody in violation of the Constitution..." When a federal court grants a writ of habeas corpus, it orders the state court to release the prisoner, or to repeat the trial, sentencing, or other proceeding that led to the prisoner's custody. Each year, state prisoners file between 16,000 and 18,000 cases seeking habeas corpus relief. The study was the first to collect empirical information about this litigation, a decade after AEDPA was passed. It sought to shed light upon an otherwise unexplored area of habeas corpus law by looking at samples of capital and non-capital cases and describing the court processing and general demographic information of these cases in detail. AEDPA changed habeas law by: Establishing a 1-year statute of limitation for filing a federal habeas petition, which begins when appeal of the state judgment is complete, and is tolled during "properly filed" state post-conviction proceedings;; Authorizing federal judges to deny on the merits any claim that a petitioner failed to exhaust in state court;; Prohibiting a federal court from holding an evidentiary hearing when the petitioner failed to develop the facts in state court, except in limited circumstances;; Barring successive petitions, except in limited circumstances; and; Mandating a new standard of review for evaluating state court determinations of fact and applications of constitutional law.; The information found within this study is for policymakers who design or assess changes in habeas law, for litigants and courts who address the scope and meaning of the habeas statutes, and for researchers who seek information concerning the processing of habeas petitions in federal courts. Descriptive findings are provided detailing petitioner demographics, state proceedings, representation of petitioner in federal court, petitions, type of proceeding challenged, claims raised, intermediate orders, litigation steps, processing time, non-merits dispositions and merits disposition for both capital and non-capital cases which lead into the comparative and explanatory findings that provide information on current and past habeas litigation and how it has been effected by the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996.

《美国联邦地区法院人身保护令诉讼实证研究（2007）》旨在提供州囚犯依据1996年《反恐怖主义与有效死刑执行法》（Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act, AEDPA）在美国联邦地区法院提起的人身保护令状（writ of habeas corpus）案件的实证信息。人身保护令状是一种由成文法规范的救济途径，联邦法院可为被"羁押且其羁押违反宪法……"的主体提供该救济。当联邦法院签发人身保护令状时，会指令州法院释放该囚犯，或重新开展导致该囚犯被羁押的审判、量刑或其他诉讼程序。每年，州囚犯都会提起1.6万至1.8万件寻求人身保护令救济的案件。

本研究是在AEDPA颁布十年后首个针对此类诉讼收集实证信息的研究。研究通过选取死刑与非死刑案件样本，详细阐述法院审理流程与案件的整体人口统计特征，旨在厘清此前尚未被深入探究的人身保护令法领域。

AEDPA对人身保护令法作出了如下修改：一是设立联邦人身保护令申请的1年诉讼时效，该时效自州判决上诉程序终结之日起算，且在"正式提交"的州定罪后程序期间暂停计算；二是授权联邦法官可基于实体理由驳回请愿人未在州法院穷尽救济的任何诉求；三是禁止联邦法院在请愿人未在州法院充分举证的情况下举行证据听证，但有限情形除外；四是禁止重复提交申请，仅有限情形除外；五是确立评估州法院事实认定与宪法法律适用的全新审查标准。

本研究所得信息面向三类群体：一是制定或评估人身保护令法改革方案的政策制定者；二是处理人身保护令成文法适用范围与内涵的诉讼当事人与法院；三是寻求联邦法院人身保护令申请审理相关信息的研究人员。

本研究提供了描述性研究结果，详细涵盖死刑与非死刑案件中请愿人的人口统计特征、州诉讼程序、请愿人在联邦法院的代理情况、申请情况、被质疑的诉讼程序类型、所提诉求、中间裁定、诉讼流程、审理时长、非实体性裁判与实体性裁判；上述内容可为比较性与解释性研究结果提供支撑，这些研究结果揭示了当前与既往的人身保护令诉讼现状，以及1996年《反恐怖主义与有效死刑执行法》对该类诉讼产生的影响。