What is federal habeas corpus for state prisoners in Alabama? What are the time limits?

I have been told before by state prisoners seeking postconviction relief that they want to take their cases to federal court with a habeas corpus petition. Certainly reasonable, but I would like to make a few points clear about Alabama state prisoners seeking federal habeas corpus relief.

So, what is it and how can it help me?

Federal habeas corpus, or a 2254 petition, is generally the last resort for a state prisoner after all available state remedies have failed. Federal habeas corpus is limited to violations of the United States Constitution. [1] By contrast, if the error complained about is an issue of state law without any federal constitutional implications, the error cannot be raised on a federal habeas corpus petition. [2]

Relief can be granted on two specific grounds [3]:

(1) The state court decision resulted in a decision that was contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly established Federal law, as determined by the Supreme Court of the United States, or

(2) The state court decision resulted in a decision that was based on an unreasonable determination of the facts in light of the evidence presented in the State court proceeding.

What does all that mean?

Generally, a state court decision is “contrary to” clearly established federal law when the state court arrives at a conclusion that is opposite to a conclusion of the U.S. Supreme Court on a question of law or a set of extremely similar facts. [4] A state court decision involves an unreasonable application of clearly established federal law where if identifies the correct governing law from the U.S. Supreme Court but unreasonably applies it. [5] Finally, a state court’s factual findings may become an unreasonable determination of the facts if the direction of the evidence, viewed cumulatively, was too powerful to conclude anything but what the state prisoner alleges or was clearly erroneous. [6]

 There are two other important factors to consider: Timeliness and exhaustion.

So, when is a federal habeas corpus petition timely for Alabama state prisoners?

The governing statute allows a period of one (1) year from the date that the state judgment becomes final to file a petition for writ of habeas corpus in federal court. [7] If no appeal is taken, the judgment becomes final on the date that the time for seeking a direct appeal expires. [8] That time under Alabama law is 42-days. [9]

The one (1) year federal habeas “clock” is “tolled,” or stopped, whenever a properly filed application for postconviction relief is filed. [10] In Alabama, a Rule 32 petition is a tolling motion for the federal clock as long as it is properly filed within the meaning of the rule and all its requirements. [11]

For Alabama state prisoners who do appeal, the concept of timeliness and exhaustion become intertwined. Allow me to explain:

Federal habeas corpus filed by a state prisoner requires the state prisoner to “exhaust” the remedies in state court. [12] The word “exhaust” means pursue each available remedy to the fullest extent allowed by the state before bringing the claim in federal court. This includes seeking discretionary review in the state supreme court where discretionary review is part of the ordinary appellate review process. [13] The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, which is over Florida, Georgia, and Alabama, has held that seeking discretionary certiorari review in the Alabama Supreme Court is a regular part of the appellate process because any federal law question would fit in one of the available grounds for discretionary review. [14] Because the Alabama Rules of Appellate Procedure require a motion for rehearing as a prerequisite to seeking discretionary review, this means that filing for rehearing following denial in the Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals is also required. [15]

For Alabama state prisoners who took a direct appeal after being convicted and pursued it all the way through certiorari review to the Alabama Supreme Court, the one (1) year time limit for federal habeas corpus begins ninety (90) days after the Alabama Supreme Court declined certiorari. [16] Why? Because of the 90-day availability of seeking certiorari review in the U.S. Supreme Court.

HOWEVER, it must be noted that the time limit for Rule 32 postconviction relief is less than that of federal habeas corpus. Rule 32 petitions must be filed within one (1) year of the certificate of judgment on appeal. [17]

If all that seems complicated, it is. A survey of federal habeas corpus law involving petitions filed by state prisoners shows that attorneys and self-represented litigants alike have all struggled to abide by the rules. I have heard federal habeas corpus law spoken of as one of the most complicated fields of law.

If anything, the complications of federal habeas corpus underscore how important it is for Alabama petitioners to get their initial Rule 32 petition right to set themselves up for the possibility of federal habeas corpus down the line in the event that the state proceedings get denied.

Should you or someone you love needs help navigating federal habeas corpus or Rule 32 relief, contact Peter Armstrong, Attorney at Law, for a free consultation.

References:

1.    28 U.S.C. § 2254(a). (https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/28/2254)

2.    Estelle v. McGuire, 502 U.S. 62, 67 (1991). (https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/502/62/)

3.    28 U.S.C. § 2254(d)(1) & (2).

4.    Williams v. Taylor, 529 U.S. 362, 412-13 (2000) (O’Connor, J., concurring). (https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/529/362/)

5.    Id.

6.    Miller-El v. Dretke, 545 U.S. 231, 265 (2005). (https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/545/231/)

7.    28 U.S.C. § 2244(d)(1)(A). (https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/28/2244)

8.    Bridges v. Johnson, 284 F.3d 1201, 1202 (11th Cir. 2002). (https://www.casemine.com/judgement/us/59147ba2add7b04934420952)

9.    Alabama Rule of Appellate Procedure 4(b)(1). (https://judicial.alabama.gov/docs/library/rules/ap4.pdf)

10. McCloud v. Hooks, 560 F.3d 1223, 1227 (11th Cir. 2009). (https://www.casemine.com/judgement/us/59146808add7b049342bd73a)

11. Id.

12. 28 U.S.C. § 2254(b)(1)(A).

13. O’Sullivan v. Boerckel, 526 U.S. 838, 845-47 (1999). (https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/526/838/)

14. Smith v. Jones, 256 F.3d 1135, 1140-41 (11th Cir. 2001). (https://case-law.vlex.com/vid/smith-v-jones-no-894536901)

15. Alabama Rule of Appellate Procedure 40(d)(1). (https://judicial.alabama.gov/docs/library/rules/ap40.pdf)

16. Nix v. Sec’y, Fla. Dep’t of Corr., 393 F.3d 1235, 1236-37 (11th Cir. 2004). (https://www.casemine.com/judgement/us/591475fbadd7b049343b9f78)

17. Alabama Rule of Criminal Procedure 32.2(c). (https://judicial.alabama.gov/docs/library/rules/cr32_2.pdf)