U.S. Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs Bureau of Justice Statistics Prisoner Petitions in the Federal Courts, 1980-96 Federal Justice Statistics Program October 1997, NCJ-164615 The full text of this report is available through: * the BJS Clearinghouse, 1-800-732-3277 * on the Internet at http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/ * on the BJS gopher: gopher://www.ojp.usdoj.gov:70/11/bjs/ * on the National Criminal Justice Reference Service Electronic Bulletin Board (set at 8-N-1, call 301-738-8895, select BJS). By John Scalia BJS Statistician John Scalia of the Bureau of Justice Statistics wrote this report. Kevin J. Strom compiled the time-series data. David Rauma, Ph.D., and George Cort of the Federal Judicial Center provided the data to BJS for analysis. Steven R. Schlesinger, Ph.D. of the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts and Roger A. Hanson of the National Center for State Courts reviewed the report for content. Carol DeFrances and Andrew H. Press of BJS provided statistical review. Tom Hester and Tina Dorsey edited the report. Marilyn Marbrook, assisted by Yvonne Boston and Jayne Robinson, administered production. Data presented in this report may be obtained from the National Archive of Criminal Justice Data at the University of Michigan, 1-800-999-0960. An electronic version of this report and other reports are available from the BJS Internet page: http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/ ------------------- Highlights ------------------- * Between 1980 and 1996, the number of petitions filed in U.S. district courts by Federal and State inmates increased from 23,230 to 68,235. * While the number of petitions filed increased, the rate at which inmates filed petitions decreased 17% from 72.7 petitions per 1,000 inmates to 60.5. * Fewer than 2% the petitions were adjudicated in favor of the inmate; most (62%) were dismissed. * 24% of the petitions terminated in U.S. district court were later appealed. * Between 1980 and 1996, the number of prisoner petitions appealed increased from 3,675 to 17,002. * 88% of Federal and State inmates represented themselves on appeal. --------------------------- Petitions by State inmates --------------------------- * State inmates initated 81% of all prisoner petitions filed during 1996; most (73%) alleged a civil rights violation. * 21% of State inmates under a sentence of death had a habeas corpus petition active in the Federal courts during 1995. ----------------------------- Petitions by Federal Inmates ----------------------------- * 74% of the petitions filed by Federal inmates challenged the constitutionality of the sentence imposed. * Between 1987 and 1996, the num-ber of petitions by Federal inmates challenging the sentence imposed increased from 1,664 to 9,729. * 43% of the petitions by Federal inmates challenging the the sentence were later appealed. ------------- Introduction ------------- ---------- Overview ---------- Pursuant to Federal law, Federal and State inmates are able to file suits in the Federal courts to: (1) challenge the constitutionality of their imprisonment (habeas corpus); (2) redress deprivations by government officials of any civil rights secured by the Constitution; (3) compel government officials to perform a duty owed to the petitioner (mandamus); and (4), in the case of Federal inmates, to challenge the constitutionality of the sentence imposed (vacate sentence). The growth in the Federal and State prison population over the last 16 years has been accompanied by an increase in prisoner litigation in the Federal courts -- both U.S. district courts (trial) and U.S. courts of appeal (appellate). Between 1980 and 1996 the number of prisoner petitions filed in U.S. district courts by Federal and State inmates increased nearly threefold from 23,230 during 1980 to 68,235 during 1996. Similarly, the number of appeals involving prisoner issues has increased fourfold from 3,675 during 1980 to 16,992 during 1996. While the number of prisoner petitions filed increased between 1980 and 1996, the rate at which both Federal and State inmates filed these petitions declined. During 1980 approximately 72.7 prisoner petitions were filed in U.S. district court for every 1,000 inmates incarcerated in Federal and State prisons. By 1996 the filing rate had decreased approximately 17%to 60.5 petitions for every 1,000 inmates. An increasing proportion of prisoner petitions terminated in U.S. district court were appealed to the U.S. courts of appeal. Between 1980 and 1996 the rate at which prisoner petitions were appealed increased 48% -- from 17.2 appellate filings for every 100 district court terminations during 1980 to 25.4 during 1996. More than half of the prisoner petitions filed in the Federal courts (both the U.S. district courts and U.S. courts of appeal) alleged civil rights violations. About a quarter of the petitions sought habeas corpus relief. Petitions filed by Federal inmates, however, primarily challenged the constitutionality of the sentence imposed: approximately two-thirds of the petitions filed by Federal inmates were petitions to vacate the sentence imposed. ------------------------------------------------------ Tracking prisoner petitions through the Federal courts ------------------------------------------------------ Petitions filed by Federal and State inmates in the Federal courts can take several years to process to their conclusion. After the district court disposes of the petition, the petitioner has the option to appeal the district court ruling to the U.S. courts of appeal. Of those prisoner petitions filed in U.S. district court by Federal and State inmates during 1990, almost all (99%) had been disposed of by the district court by the end of 1995. About a quarter (23.7%) of those cases filed in U.S. district courts during 1990 were appealed to the U.S. courts of appeal. Fewer than 2% of those petitions filed during 1990 were, at least partially, adjudicated in favor of the inmate by the end of 1995. Approximately 11% were still pending with either the district court or the appellate court 5 years after the initial filing. Petitions dismissed ******************** More than half (56%) of the prisoner petitions filed in U.S. district court during 1990 were dismissed by the district court. About a quarter (23.1%) of those cases dismissed were appealed. By the end of 1995, the appellate courts had disposed of 54% of these cases. Of those cases disposed of by the appellate courts, the district courts rulings were affirmed (at least in part) in 80.7% of the cases and reversed (at least in part) in 11% of the cases. Petitions adjudicated ********************* Less than half (43%) of the prisoner petitions filed in U.S. district court during 1990 were adjudicated by the district court. Almost all (95%) of those cases adjudicated (where a judgment was reported) were adjudicated exclusively in favor of the government --in an additional 1% of the cases both the government and the inmate partially prevailed. About a quarter (24%) of those cases adjudicated by the district court were appealed. The government filed an appeal in 26.8% of the cases decided in favor of the inmate whereas inmates appealed 23.9% of the cases decided in favor of the government. The government succeeded in having the district courts' ruling overturned in 10% of the cases. Petitions pending ****************** Fewer than 1% of those prisoner petitions filed with the district court during 1990 were still pending with the district court at the end of 1995. However, of the 250 cases identified as pending with the district court at the end of 1995, about 42% had been appealed. (A litigant may file interlocutory appeals addressing specific aspects of the case or appeals addressing the timeliness of the district court's handling of the case.) Two-thirds of those cases disposed of by the appellate courts affirmed the district courts' handling of the cases. ------------------------------------------------- Legal representation of Federal and State inmates ------------------------------------------------- While prisoner petitions involve criminal defendants and -- particularly in the case of habeas corpus -- routinely address criminal law issues, these proceedings are considered civil rather than criminal in nature. Unlike criminal proceedings, parties involved in civil proceedings are not entitled to court-appointed counsel if they are indigent (Pennsylvania v. Finley, 481 U.S. 551 (1987.) The Federal courts, however, are provided some discretion in appointing counsel for indigent litigants. Counsel for the indigent is appointed at the discretion of the courts when warranted such as in cases where the facts are undisputed but the issues are too complex for an inmate to handle (28 U.S.C.  1915.) Previous BJS reports indicated that more than 90% of inmates who file prisoner petitions in U.S. district court file their petitions pro se -- representing themselves before the court (Roger A. Hanson and Henry W.K. Daley, Federal Habeas Corpus Review, BJS Discussion Paper, NCJ-155504, 1995.) Similarly, 88% of the inmates involved in an appeal of a prisoner petition represented themselves on appeal (table 1). (Data describing the petitioners' representation were unavailable for petitions handled in U.S. district courts.) Federal inmates were more likely than State inmates to be represented by legal counsel on appeal. Legal counsel represented approximately 18% of Federal inmates on appeal, compared to fewer than 10% of State inmates. Table 1. Representation of Federal and State inmates in cases filed in U.S. courts of appeal, 1995 Jurisdiction and Legal type of petition Number Pro se counsel ------------------------------------------------ Total 14,992 88.3% 11.7% Federal 3,459 81.8% 18.2% Vacate sentence 2,221 80.2 19.8 Habeas corpus 456 76.3 23.7 Death penalty 0 -- -- Other 456 76.3 23.7 Civil rights 557 91.0 9.0 Other 225 85.3 14.7 State 11,533 90.2% 9.8% Habeas corpus 3,939 81.6 18.4 Death penalty 129 3.9 96.1 Other 3,810 84.3 15.7 Civil rights 7,529 94.7 5.3 Other 65 92.3 7.7 -- No cases of this type occurred in the data. Data source: Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, civil data file (1995). Inmates who alleged civil rights violations were more likely to represent themselves on appeal than other petitioners. During 1995, 91% of Federal inmates and 94.7% of State inmates who filed civil rights petitions represented themselves on appeal, whereas 76.3% of Federal inmates and 81.6% of State inmates seeking habeas corpus relief represented themselves on appeal. --------------------------------------------- Prisoner petitions in U.S. district courts ---------------------------------------------- ------------------------- Prisoner petitions filed ------------------------- During 1995 Federal and State inmates filed 60,855 prisoner petitions in U.S. district court (table 2). Two-thirds of the petitions filed alleged civil rights violations. Habeas corpus petitions represented approximately 23% of the caseload. The remainder were mandamus petitions (1%) or petitions by Federal inmates challenging a sentence (10%). State inmates filed the majority (86%) of the petitions. Table 2. Petitions filed in U.S. district court by Federal and State inmates, 1995 Type of petition ---------------------------------------------- Habeas corpus ---------------- Region Vacate Death Civil 1995 prison and jurisdiction Total sentence penalty Other Mandamus rights population* --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- U.S. total 60,855 5,814 169 13,966 863 40,043 1,078,545 Federal 8,637 5,814 6 1,260 485 1,072 89,538 State 52,218 -- 163 12,706 378 38,971 989,007 Northeast 7,020 -- 12 1,696 52 5,260 156,305 Connecticut 450 -- 0 75 3 372 14,681 Maine 98 -- ** 17 0 81 1,455 Massachusetts 212 -- ** 62 9 141 10,369 New Hampshire 81 -- + 28 1 52 2,002 New Jersey 845 -- 0 241 1 603 22,808 New York 2,495 -- 0 627 14 1,854 68,489 Pennsylvania 2,697 -- 12 597 20 2,068 32,402 Rhode Island 90 -- ** 32 4 54 2,854 Vermont 52 -- ** 17 0 35 1,245 Midwest 10,362 -- 33 2,464 59 7,806 192,757 Illinois 1,587 -- 15 279 17 1,276 37,658 Indiana 1,604 -- 2 588 10 1,004 16,125 Iowa 879 -- ** 87 10 782 5,906 Kansas 351 -- + 83 3 265 7,055 Michigan 1,581 -- ** 368 3 1,210 41,112 Minnesota 159 -- ** 46 0 113 4,628 Missouri 1,903 -- 11 405 4 1,483 19,151 Nebraska 373 -- 0 50 0 323 3,051 North Dakota 15 -- ** 4 2 9 670 Ohio 1,097 -- 5 358 7 727 44,338 South Dakota 105 -- 0 50 0 55 1,864 Wisconsin 708 -- ** 146 3 559 11,199 South 25,541 -- 92 5,788 182 19,479 427,105 Alabama 1,941 -- 6 517 1 1,417 20,549 Arkansas 1,188 -- 2 192 6 988 8,364 Delaware 295 -- 1 76 1 217 4,799 District of Columbia 272 -- ** 19 5 248 9,277 Florida 3,034 -- 10 1,100 39 1,885 63,879 Georgia 1,904 -- 0 375 21 1,508 34,266 Kentucky 946 -- 0 165 6 775 9,928 Louisiana 1,899 -- 3 319 28 1,549 16,976 Maryland 928 -- 0 202 5 721 21,124 Mississippi 1,261 -- 3 180 1 1,077 10,124 North Carolina 848 -- 1 82 7 758 27,313 Oklahoma 758 -- 7 286 3 462 14,568 South Carolina 850 -- 3 183 7 657 18,864 Tennessee 1,326 -- 0 234 10 1,082 13,040 Texas 5,263 -- 46 1,437 26 3,754 127,766 Virginia 2,605 -- 10 364 14 2,217 23,890 West Virginia 223 -- ** 57 2 164 2,378 West 9,155 -- 26 2,711 81 6,337 212,840 Alaska 78 -- ** 28 0 50 2,832 Arizona 1,638 -- 3 332 14 1,289 21,341 California 4,172 -- 17 1,503 35 2,617 135,133 Colorado 672 -- 0 97 2 573 9,508 Hawaii 112 -- ** 30 1 81 2,812 Idaho 105 -- 0 25 0 80 3,079 Montana 106 -- 1 24 0 81 1,601 Nevada 702 -- 2 214 3 483 7,599 New Mexico 206 -- 0 78 0 128 4,209 Oregon 387 -- 2 135 23 227 7,812 Utah 207 -- 1 24 1 181 3,985 Washington 685 -- 0 195 2 488 11,679 Wyoming 85 -- + 26 0 59 1,250 Note: Excludes transfers, remands, and statistical closures. Detail does not sum to total; total for State includes petitions filed by inmates in the custody of the outlying territories -- Puerto Rico, Virgin Islands, Guam, and the Northern Marianas Islands. -- No Federal jurisdiction. *Data source: BJS, Correctional Populations in the United States, 1995, NCJ-163916. **Jurisdiction without a death penalty during 1995. +Jurisdiction had no prisoners under a sentence of death during 1995. While most of the petitions filed in the Federal courts are filed by State inmates, because the Federal courts have original jurisdiction over matters dealing with Federal inmates, Federal inmates file petitions in Federal court at a greater rate than State inmates. During 1995 Federal inmates filed 96.5 petitions for every 1,000 inmates in Federal custody compared with 52.8 petitions for every 1,000 State inmates. However, compared to State inmates, Federal inmates file few civil rights, habeas corpus, or mandamus petitions. The majority (67%) of the petitions filed by Federal inmates challenged the constitutionality of the sentence imposed. During 1995 State prison inmates incarcerated in Iowa (148.8 petitions per 1,000 inmates), Arkansas (142.0), and Mississippi (124.6) filed petitions in U.S. district courts at the highest rates (cover map). Compared to those in other regions of the United States, inmates incarcerated in the South filed petitions at the highest rate -- 59.8 petitions per 1,000 inmates (not shown in a table). More than three-quarters of the petitions filed by Southern inmates alleged civil rights violations. Inmates incarcerated in Massachusetts (20.4), North Dakota (22.4), and Ohio (24.7), by contrast, filed petitions at the lowest rates. Trends in prisoner petitions filed ************************************* ------------- Cases filed ------------- Between 1980 and 1996 the number of petitions filed in U.S. district courts by Federal and State inmates increased threefold -- from 23,230 during 1980 to 68,235 during 1996 (table 3). Petitions filed by Federal inmates increased at a slightly faster rate (8% average annual rate) than those filed by State inmates (7% average annual increase). Table 3. Prisoner petitions filed in U.S. district court by Federal and State inmates, 1980-96 Jurisdiction and type of petition --------------------------------------------------------------------- Federal State ------------------------------------- ---------------------------- Vacate Habeas Man- Civil Habeas Man- Civil Year Total Total sentence corpus damus rights Total corpus damus rights --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1980 23,230 3,661 1,322 1,413 323 603 19,569 7,029 145 12,395 1981 27,655 4,053 1,248 1,629 342 834 23,602 7,786 177 15,639 1982 29,275 4,328 1,186 1,927 381 834 24,947 8,036 172 16,739 1983 30,765 4,354 1,311 1,914 339 790 26,411 8,523 202 17,686 1984 31,093 4,526 1,427 1,905 372 822 26,567 8,335 198 18,034 1985 33,452 6,262 1,527 3,405 373 957 27,190 8,520 180 18,490 1986 33,758 4,432 1,556 1,679 427 770 29,326 9,040 215 20,071 1987 37,279 4,507 1,664 1,808 313 722 32,772 9,524 276 22,972 1988 38,825 5,130 2,071 1,867 330 862 33,695 9,867 270 23,558 1989 41,472 5,577 2,526 1,818 315 918 35,895 10,545 311 25,039 1990 42,623 6,611 2,970 1,967 525 1,149 36,012 10,817 352 24,843 1991 42,452 6,817 3,328 2,112 378 999 35,635 10,325 267 25,043 1992 48,417 6,997 3,983 1,507 597 910 41,420 11,296 479 29,645 1993 53,436 8,456 5,379 1,467 695 915 44,980 11,574 388 33,018 1994 57,928 7,700 4,628 1,441 491 1,140 50,228 11,908 395 37,925 1995 63,634 8,951 5,988 1,343 510 1,110 54,593 13,627 397 40,569 1996 68,235 13,069 9,729 1,703 444 1,219 55,166 14,726 444 39,996 Note: Includes transfers, remands, and statistical closures. Data source: Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, Report of the Proceedings of the Judicial Conference of the United States, (table C-2). The increase in State prisoner petitions primarily reflects a threefold increase in the number of civil rights petitions filed. Civil rights petitions filed by State inmates increased an average of 8% annually -- increasing from 12,395 during 1980 to 39,996 during 1996. Federal civil rights petitions, by contrast, increased 5% annually -- from 603 during 1980 to 1,219 during 1996. Similarly, the number of habeas corpus petitions by State inmates increased at a faster rate than those by Federal inmates. The number of State habeas corpus petitions increased almost 5% annually -- from 7,029 during 1980 to 14,726 during 1996 -- while the number of Federal petitions remained relatively stable. While the increase in petitions filed by State inmates reflects an increase in civil rights petitions, the increase in the number of petitions filed by Federal inmates primarily reflects an increase in the number of petitions challenging the sentence imposed. Between 1980 and 1996, petitions by Federal inmates challenging the sentence imposed increased more than sevenfold -- from 1,322 during 1980 to 9,729 during 1996 (The increase in petitions to vacate the sentence imposed between 1995 and 1996 may be the result of the Supreme Court decision in Bailey v. United States, __ U.S. __, 116 S.CT. 501, 113 L.Ed. 2d 472(1996). In this case the Supreme Court limited the applicability of 18 U.S.C.  924(e) to those cases where the defendant actually used the weapon while committing the offense rather than merely possessing it.) Most (96%) of the increase in petitions challenging the sentence imposed followed the implementation of major reforms to Federal sentencing policy. The Sentencing Reform Act of 1984, which became effective on November 1, 1987, established the Federal sentencing guidelines, abolished parole, reduced good conduct time, and required increased terms of imprisonment for recidivists. Further, the Sentencing Reform Act, the Anti-Drug Abuse Acts of 1986 and 1988, and the Comprehensive Crime Control Act of 1990, established mandatory minimum terms of imprisonment for defendants trafficking drugs and defendants using a firearm to commit an offense. Many defendants have challenged these sentencing reforms (and the sentences imposed pursuant to these reforms) on direct appellate review. During 1995, 47,556 defendants were convicted and sentenced in the Federal courts; 21% of these defendants filed a direct appeal challenging some aspect of the sentence imposed. Most (84%) of these appellants, however, were unsuccessful. Having unsuccessfully challenged the sentence imposed on direct appeal, many Federal inmates have turned to civil remedies in another attempt to have the sentence vacated or otherwise reduced. -------------- Filing rate -------------- While the number of prisoner petitions filed in U.S. district courts substantially increased between 1980 and 1996, the Nation's prison population was also substantially increasing. Between 1980 and 1996, the number of persons incarcerated in the Nation's prisons (both Federal and State facilities) increased an average of 8.2% annually -- from 319,598 inmates incarcerated during 1980 to 1.13 million during 1996 (table 4). The Federal prison population increased at a slightly faster rate (9% annually) than the State prison population (8% annually). Table 4. Number of persons held in Federal and State prisons, 1980-96 Year Total Federal State ---------------------------------- 1980 319,598 23,779 295,819 1981 360,029 26,778 333,251 1982 402,914 27,311 375,603 1983 423,898 28,945 394,953 1984 448,264 30,875 417,389 1985 487,593 35,781 451,812 1986 526,436 39,781 486,655 1987 562,814 42,478 520,336 1988 606,810 44,205 562,605 1989 683,382 53,387 629,995 1990 743,382 58,838 684,544 1991 792,535 63,930 728,605 1992 850,566 72,071 778,495 1993 909,381 80,815 828,566 1994 990,147 85,500 904,647 1995 1,078,545 89,538 989,007 1996* 1,128,274 95,088 1,033,186 Note: Data represent the population as of December 31; *Preliminary numbers. Source: BJS, Correctional Populations in the United States, annual. The increase in the prison population has been accompanied by a similar increase in the number of prisoner petitions filed in Federal court. However, accounting for the increase in the prison population, the rate at which inmates filed petitions declined by approximately 17% between 1980 and 1996. During 1980, 72.7 petitions were filed for every 1,000 inmates incarcerated in both Federal and State prisons. By 1996 the filing rate had decreased to 60.5 petitions. The filing rate for Federal inmates varied substantially between 1980 and 1996. After an overall increase between 1980 and 1985, the rate at which Federal inmates filed prisoner petitions decreased by 43% between 1985 and 1995. This decline was largely attributable to substantial decreases in the rates in which Federal inmates filed habeas corpus, civil rights, and mandamus petitions. The rate at which Federal inmates filed habeas corpus petitions declined by 84%; civil rights by 53%; and mandamus by 46%. However, between 1995 and 1996, the filing rate increased by 37%. This increase was primarily attributable to a substantial increase in the rate at which Federal inmates filed petitions to vacate the sentence imposed. Beginning in 1988 (after the implementation of Federal sentencing reforms) petitions by Federal inmates to vacate the sentence imposed began to increase. While Federal inmates were filing habeas corpus, civil rights, and mandamus petitions at lower rates, they filed petitions to vacate the sentence at higher rates. Between 1987 and 1996, the rate at which Federal inmates filed petitions challenging the sentence imposed increased by 161% -- from 39.2 petitions per 1,000 inmates during 1987 to 102.3 during 1996. Compared to the filing rate for Federal inmates, the filing rate for State inmates was relatively constant. Nonetheless, the filing rate for State inmates declined 19% between 1980 and 1996 -- from 66.2 petitions per 1,000 inmates during 1980 to 53.4 petitions during 1996. Three-quarters of the decrease in State petitions was attributable to a decline in the rate at which State inmates filed habeas corpus petitions. The filing rate of State habeas corpus petitions declined 40% -- from 23.8 petitions per 1,000 inmates during 1980 to 14.3 petitions during 1995. The filing rate for State civil rights petitions declined by 25% -- from 41.9 during 1980 to 38.7 during 1995. ----------------------------------------------------- Prisoner petitions adjudicated in U.S. district court ----------------------------------------------------- Mode of disposition ******************** During 1995 U.S. district courts disposed of 57,982 prisoner petitions. More than half of these petitions were dismissed (table 5). Of those cases terminated during 1995 -- Table 5. Mode of disposition for prisoner petitions terminated in U.S. district court, 1995 Percent of cases -------------------------- Jurisdiction and Judgment type of petition Number* Dismissed Trial Other ---------------------------------------------------------- Total 57,968 62.1% 1.8% 36.1% Federal 7,797 64.3% .3% 35.4% Vacate sentence 4,876 66.1 .2 33.7 Habeas corpus 1,252 61.2 .2 38.7 Death penalty 5 -- -- -- Other 1,247 61.1 .2 38.7 Mandamus 539 72.4 0 27.6 Civil rights 1,130 56.0 1 43.0 State 50,159 61.8% 2.0% 36.2% Habeas corpus 11,838 58.7 .2 41.1 Death penalty 129 66.7 .8 32.6 Other 11,709 58.6 .2 41.2 Mandamus 378 70.9 .8 28.3 Civil rights 37,943 62.7 2.6 34.7 Note: Excludes transfers, remands, and statistical closures. Trial includes cases for which a trial was scheduled but not necessarily completed before dispositions. In some cases, the parties might have settled before the completion of the trial. --Too few cases to obtain statistically reliable data. Data source: Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, civil data file (1995). * Includes 12 cases for which jurisdiction could not be determined but excludes 14 cases for which mode of disposition could not be determined. * 64% of those petitions filed by Federal inmates and 62% of those filed by State inmates were dismissed; * 66% of those petitions by Federal inmates challenging the sentence imposed were dismissed; and * Mandamus petitions were dismissed at the highest rate: 72% of those petitions filed by Federal inmates and 71% of those by State inmates. Overall, few (1.8%) prisoner petitions were adjudicated at trial. Civil rights petitions, however, were the most likely to be adjudicated by trial: almost 2.6% of civil rights petitions filed by State inmates and 1% of those filed by Federal inmates. Thirty-six percent of the cases were disposed of by means such as consent decrees, judgments on pretrial motions, or arbitrated judgments. Of these cases, most (80%) were disposed of following a pretrial motion (not shown in a table). ------------- Disposition ------------- Of the 57,982 prisoner petitions terminated in U.S. district court during 1995, 1.2% were adjudicated in favor of the plaintiff -- the inmate (table 6). Table 6. Disposition of prisoner petitions terminated in U.S. district court, 1995 Percent of petitions disposed -------------------------------------- Judgment ------------------- Jurisdiction and Govern- type of petition Number* Dismissed Inmate ment Both Total 57,982 62.1% 1.2% 36.3% .4% Federal 7,804 64.2% 3.8% 31.9% .2% Vacate sentence 4,883 66.0 5.1 28.7 .2 Habeas corpus 1,252 61.2 2.0 36.3 .5 Death penalty 5 -- -- -- -- Other 1,247 61.1 1.9 36.5 .5 Mandamus 539 72.4 2.0 25.6 0 Civil rights 1,130 55.8 .6 43.5 0 State 50,166 61.8% .7% 37.0% .5% Habeas corpus 11,841 58.6 1.2 39.6 .5 Death penalty 129 66.7 2.3 29.5 1.6 Other 11,712 58.6 1.2 39.7 .5 Mandamus 378 70.9 1.9 27.2 0 Civil rights 37,947 62.6 .6 36.3 .4 Note: Excludes transfers, remands, and statistical closures. --Too few cases to obtain statistically reliable data. Data source: Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, civil data file (1995). *Includes 12 cases for which jurisdiction could not be determined. Additionally, in 0.4% of the cases both the inmate and the government partially prevailed. Compared to State inmates, a slightly higher proportion of Federal inmates were successful with their suits. Of the 7,804 petitions filed by Federal inmates that were terminated during 1995, 4% were adjudicated at least partially in favor of the inmate. Approximately 5% of the petitions to vacate the sentence imposed were adjudicated in favor of the inmate; 2% of habeas corpus petitions (including the only death penalty petition), 2% of the mandamus petitions, and 0.6% of the civil rights petitions were adjudicated in favor of the defendant, at least in part. In contrast to the outcome of petitions filed by Federal inmates, of the 50,166 petitions by State inmates terminated during 1995, about 1% were adjudicated at least partially in favor of the inmate. Habeas corpus petitions by death row inmates were the most successful -- 3.9% of these petitions were adjudicated at least partially in favor of the inmate -- and, similar to the outcome of petitions by Federal inmates, civil rights petitions were the least successful --1% were adjudicated at least partially in favor of the inmate. While the success rate of prisoner petitions is low overall, in those cases adjudicated by the courts -- not dismissed -- inmates were slightly more successful. Of those cases for which there was a judgment, 3% were adjudicated in favor of the inmate -- including 15% of petitions by Federal inmates challenging the sentence imposed. Additionally, in 1% of the cases both the inmate and the government partially prevailed. Case processing time ********************* Prisoner petitions terminated during 1995 were processed in approximately 9 months (274 days), on average (table 7). Half of the cases, however, took less than 5 months (161 days). Habeas corpus petitions generally took longer (285 days) than other types of petitions (not shown in a table). Table 7. Case processing time for prisoner petitions terminated in U.S. district court, 1995 Days between filing and termination --------------------------------------------- Percentile of terminations Jurisdiction and ------------------------------------ type of petition Number* 10th 25th 50th 75th 90th Average ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Total 57,982 8 49 161 364 681 273.9 Federal 7,804 12 53 141 297 544 228.9 Vacate sentence 4,883 14 56 137 284 521 220.6 Habeas corpus 1,252 11 48 129 271 492 207.8 Death penalty 5 -- --- --- --- --- --- Other 1,247 12 48 129 270 483 205.4 Mandamus 539 22 62 191 442 784 300.1 Civil rights 1,130 0 38 165 346 561 253.8 State 50,166 8 49 166 376 702 280.9 Habeas corpus 11,841 19 71 182 386 745 297.4 Death penalty 129 1 13 349 973 1756 659.2 Other 11,712 20 72 181 384 735 293.4 Mandamus 378 4 22 72 206 396 160.2 Civil rights 37,947 6 44 161 375 689 276.9 Note: Excludes transfers, remands, and statistical closures. *Includes 12 cases for which jurisdiction could not be determined. --Too few cases to obtain a reliable estimate. Data source: Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, civil data file (1995). Petitions filed by State inmates took nearly 2 months longer, on average, than those filed by Federal inmates -- 281 days for State petitions compared to 229 days for Federal petitions. The longer case processing time for State petitions reflects, in part, differences in the mode of disposition between Federal and State petitions. The case processing time reported for State inmates, however, does not include the time spent in the State courts or in administrative proceedings. If this time were available and taken into account, the entire process for State inmates would take considerably longer than for Federal inmates. Case processing time varied substantially by mode of disposition (table 8). On average, prisoner petitions disposed of at trial took longer -- approximately 2 years (727 days) -- to process than petitions that were dismissed -- 240 days (on average) -- or those petitions disposed of by other means -- 310 days on average (not shown in a table). Table 8. Case processing time for prisoner petitions terminated in U.S. district court, 1995 Days between filing and termination ---------------------------------------------- Percentile of terminations Jurisdiction and ------------------------------------- mode of petition Number* 10th 25th 50th 75th 90th Average ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Total 57,982 8 49 161 364 681 273.9 Federal 7,804 12 53 141 297 544 228.9 Dismissal 5,010 8 46 128 281 525 215.4 Trial 23 97 197 311 517 1,257 311.0 Other 2,764 21 68 162 321 581 251.5 State 50,166 8 49 166 376 702 280.9 Dismissal 30,997 6 40 130 315 625 243.9 Trial 1,011 198 339 590 1,026 1,405 590.0 Other 18,151 13 79 223 433 738 318.9 Note: Excludes transfers, remands, and statistical closures. *Includes 12 cases for which jurisdiction could not be determined. Data source: Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, civil data file (1995). However, even after accounting for differences in mode of disposition, petitions by the State inmates took longer to process than petitions by Federal inmates: * State petitions adjudicated at trial took 590 days to process compared to 311 days for Federal petitions; * State petitions that were dismissed took 244 days to process compared to 215 days for Federal petitions; and * State petitions disposed of by other means took 319 days to process compared to 252 days for Federal petitions. Previous BJS reports indicated that case processing time varies according to the complexity of the case and whether the inmate was represented by counsel. Cases involving more complex legal issues or multiple issues generally take more time to process, on average, than cases involving less complex issues. For example, civil rights petitions involving a single issue took 268 days, on average, to process whereas petitions involving 2 issues took 312 days and those involving 3 or more issues took 433 days (not shown in a table) (Roger A. Hanson and Henry Daley, Challenging the Conditions of Prisons and Jails, BJS Discussion Paper, NCJ-151652, 1995.) Similar patterns were observed for habeas corpus petitions (Roger A. Hanson and Henry Daley, Federal Habeas Corpus Review, BJS Discussion Paper, NCJ-155504, 1995.) Similarly, cases where inmates were represented by counsel took longer (825 days, on average) than those where the inmates represented themselves (551 days) (Challenging the Conditions of Prisons and Jails, 1995.) ---------------------------------------------------------------- Habeas corpus petitions by death row inmates in State prisons ---------------------------------------------------------------- During 1995, 648 (or 21%) of inmates under a sentence of death had a habeas corpus petition active -- filed, terminated, or otherwise pending _ in the Federal courts -- U.S. district courts or U.S. courts of appeal (table). Death row petitions represented about 2% of all active habeas corpus petitions in the Federal courts during 1995 (not shown in a table). Inmates under a sentence of death had 212.7 habeas corpus petitions active in the Federal courts during 1995 for every 1,000 inmates on death row (not shown in a table). Most (65%) of these petitions were filed by inmates in those States with the greatest number of inmates under a sentence of death or executed during 1995. Virginia had the greatest proportion (66%) of death row inmates with an active habeas corpus petition (table). During 1995 Virginia executed 5 of the 56 people on its death row. Capital punishment statistics(a) -------------------------------------- Inmates under a sentence of death ---------------------- Habeas corpus Average petitions time served Inmates pending in on death executed Federal row during State courts(b) Number(c) (in years) 1995(d) ---------------------------------------------------------------- Total 648 3,046 6.5 56 Texas 141 404 6.5 19 California 84 420 7.0 0 Illinois 35 154 7.1 5 Pennsylvania 21 196 6.1 2 Missouri 56 92 6.1 6 Florida 47 362 6.9 3 Virginia 37 56 4.5 5 Other(c) 227 1,362 5.1 16 aIncludes all inmates under a sentence of death regardless of whether they had a habeas corpus petition active in the Federal courts during 1995. bIncludes all inmates who filed, or whose cases were terminated or still pending, in U.S. district courts or U.S. courts of appeal during 1995. cCapital Punishment 1995, BJS Bulletin, NCJ-162043, 1996. dSee, table 1 for details. Mode of adjudication ************************** Of the 129 death-row petitions concluded during 1995, fewer than 1% were adjudicated at trial (table 5). Two-thirds of these petitions were dismissed; and about a third were disposed of by means other than litigation. Of those petitions that were not dismissed, about 12% were adjudicated at least partially in favor of the inmate -- 7% fully and 5% partially. Case processing time *********************** Petitions by death row inmates took almost 2 years (659 days), on average, to process (table 7). Ten percent of these petitions, however, took at least 4 years and 10 months to process. (Does not include case processing time which may have previously occurred at State court level.) Appeals ***************** During 1995, 129 habeas corpus petitions involving State inmates under a sentence of death were filed with the U.S. courts of appeal (not shown in a table). Unlike other prisoner petitions, in nearly all (96%) of these cases, legal counsel represented the inmate (table 1). Almost two-thirds of those cases concluded were held over for oral hearings -- a greater fraction than of all other types of petitions (table 10). However, while the appellate courts dismissed 14% of the habeas cases, of those cases for which there was a judgment during 1995 the district courts' rulings were upheld in about 59% (table 11). Most (82.9%) of the dismissed cases were terminated on procedural bases (not shown in a table). On average, death row petitions take longer to process by the U.S. courts of appeal than other prisoner petitions. During 1995 habeas corpus petitions by State inmates under a sentence of death took nearly a year (341 days), on average, to process; 10% of the cases however, took about 2« years to process. The longer case processing time for these cases reflected, in part, the larger proportion held over for oral arguments (not shown in a table). ------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------- Prisoner petitions in U.S. courts of appeal ------------------------------------------- In the Federal system, parties involved in cases handled in U.S. district courts have the right to have a district court decision reviewed by the U.S. courts of appeal. If the appellate court finds that the district court mishandled the case and that the error deprived the party of a fair trial, the appellate court will issue an "order of reversal" and/or a "remand." A "reversal" annuls the district court's judgment in its entirety. A "remand," by contrast, requires that the district court review its decision considering the appellate court's ruling(s) and/or collect additional evidence to more appropriately adjudicate the case. If the appellate court, however, finds that the district court handled the case appropriately, it will "affirm" the district court's decision. ------------------------ Prisoner petitions filed ------------------------ During 1996, 16,992 cases involving Federal and State prisoner petitions were appealed to the U.S. courts of appeal (table 9). More than half of the cases filed on appeal originally alleged civil rights violations. (Information describing the specific issue raised in the appeal is unavailable.) More than a quarter (28.7%) originally sought habeas corpus relief; 18.1% originally challenged the constitutionality of a Federal sentence; and, the remainder (2%) involved other issues such as mandamus. State prison inmates made three-fourths of the appeals. Table 9. Prisoner petitions filed in U.S. circuit courts of appeal by Federal and State inmates, 1980-96 Number of petitions appealed ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Federal State -------------------------------------- ----------------------------- Vacate Habeas Civil Habeas Civil Year Total Total sentence corpus rights Other Total corpus rights Other -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1980 3,675 1,007 450 302 159 96 2,668 1,020 1,578 70 1981 4,311 1,155 459 344 234 118 3,156 1,258 1,851 47 1982 4,833 1,203 359 455 234 155 3,630 1,529 2,038 63 1983 5,327 1,258 388 440 282 148 4,069 1,683 2,297 89 1984 5,964 1,397 470 462 294 171 4,567 1,609 2,796 162 1985 6,532 1,510 551 531 288 140 5,022 2,172 2,772 78 1986 6,992 1,569 624 485 324 136 5,423 2,331 2,982 110 1987 8,485 1,802 712 546 349 195 6,683 2,755 3,817 111 1988 9,253 1,962 856 524 335 247 7,291 3,107 4,070 114 1989 9,557 2,065 991 493 325 256 7,492 3,168 4,224 100 1990 9,897 2,261 1,112 488 408 253 7,636 3,170 4,413 53 1991 10,454 2,338 1,154 506 389 289 8,116 3,391 4,655 70 1992 11,736 2,544 1,467 432 406 239 9,192 3,725 5,396 71 1993 12,662 2,902 1,818 421 416 247 9,760 3,612 6,044 104 1994 13,044 2,939 1,774 430 506 229 10,105 3,642 6,385 78 1995 14,981 3,457 2,215 462 555 225 11,524 3,927 7,528 69 1996 16,992 4,446 3,078 451 624 293 12,546 4,423 8,053 70 Data source: Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, Report of the Proceedings of the Judicial Conference of the United States, annual (table B-1A). The issue underlying the appeal varied by whether the inmate was in Federal or State custody. Similar to cases filed in U.S. district courts, the majority (64.2%) of appeals that involved State inmates originally alleged civil rights violations. Additionally, about a third originally sought habeas corpus relief. Two-thirds of appeals involving Federal inmates, by contrast, originally challenged the sentence imposed. Approximately 24% of those prisoner petitions that were terminated in U.S. district courts were appealed to the U.S. courts of appeal (not shown in a table). Petitions involving Federal inmates were appealed at nearly twice the rate of those involving State inmates -- 37.1 appeals per 100 district court terminations by Federal inmates compared to 22.5 by State inmates. Decisions involving civil rights petitions and petitions challenging the sentence imposed were appealed at the highest rates -- 46.5 and 42.9 petitions per 100 district court terminations, respectively. Generally, those States where inmates filed petitions in U.S. district court at the highest rates had the highest appeals rates. During 1995 petitions by inmates incarcerated in Kansas (29.6 appeals per 1,000 district court terminations), Virginia (25.3), and Iowa (25.1) were appealed at the highest rates. Civil rights petitions were appealed at the highest rates in Virginia (18.7) and Iowa (21.2). Kansas, however, had the highest appeal rate of habeas corpus petitions: 19.6 appeals per 1,000 district court terminations. By contrast, prisoner petitions by inmates incarcerated in Connecticut (3.4), Massachusetts (4.0) and Hawaii (4.8) were appealed at the lowest rates. ------------------ Trends, 1980-1995 ------------------ Appeals filed ************* Similar to the increase in prisoner petitions filed in U.S. district courts, between 1980 and 1995, the number of prisoner petitions appealed to the U.S. courts of appeal increased more than fourfold -- from 3,675 during 1980 to 16,992 during 1996 (table 9). Appeals involving State inmates (10.2% average annual increase) increased at about the same rates as Federal inmates (9.7% annually). Approximately 66% of the increase in State appeals was the result of an increase in appeals of civil rights petitions. Appeals of civil right petitions increased an average of 11% annually -- from 1,578 during 1980 to 8,053 during 1996. Appeals of habeas corpus petitions also substantially increased during this period -- from 1,020 during 1980 to 4,423 during 1995. Approximately 76% of the increase in Federal appeals was for petitions challenging the sentence imposed. These appeals increased from 450 during 1980 to 3,078 during 1996 -- an average annual increase of 13%. About 90% of this increase occurred after the implementation of Federal sentencing reforms in 1987. Although fewer in number than appeals of petitions to vacate the sentence imposed, appeals of Federal habeas corpus and civil rights petitions also increased. Appeals of habeas corpus petitions increased at an average annual rate of 3% -- from 302 during 1980 to 451 during 1996 -- and appeals of civil rights petitions increased 9% annually -- from 159 during 1980 to 624 during 1996. Filing rate ************* Between 1980 and 1996 the rate at which Federal and State prisoner petitions were appealed increased 48% -- from 17.2 appellate filings for every 100 district court terminations during 1980 to 25.4 during 1996. The appeal rate of Federal petitions increased at a greater rate than that of State petitions. Appeals of Federal petitions increased 41% -- from 26.4 appeals for every 100 district court terminations during 1980 to 37.1 during 1995. Appeals of State petitions increased 48% -- from 15.2 appeals for every 100 district court terminations during 1980 to 22.5 during 1996. ------------------------------ Prisoner petitions adjudicated ------------------------------ Mode of disposition ******************* During 1995, 14,333 prisoner petitions involving Federal and State inmates were terminated in U.S. courts of appeal. Nearly all (93.7%) of these cases were disposed of without oral hearings (table 10). In 46% of the cases, the hearings were waived. The remainder were terminated on jurisdictional bases -- the court did not have authority to hear the case (11%) -- or procedural bases -- default or voluntary dismissal (37%). Table 10. Method of disposition for prisoner petitions terminated in U.S. courts of appeal, 1995 Percent of dispositions of appeals ------------------------------------------------ Without oral hearings ------------------------------------ Jurisdiction and After oral Hearings No Procedural type of petition Number hearings waived jurisdiction termination --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Total* 14,333 6.3% 46.3% 10.5% 36.9% Federal 3,151 5.6% 62.5% 6.3% 25.5% Vacate sentence 1,973 6.1 66.8 4.7 22.5 Habeas corpus 426 8.7 50.0 5.2 36.2 Death penalty 0 -- -- -- -- Other 426 8.7 50.0 5.2 36.2 Civil rights 530 2.6 53.6 12.8 30.9 Other 222 6.3 69.8 7.2 19.8 State 11,177 6.5% 41.7% 11.7% 40.1% Habeas corpus 3,957 11.0 28.4 6.5 54.2 Death penalty 121 62.0 25.6 .8 11.6 Other 3,836 9.4 28.4 6.6 55.5 Civil rights 7,170 4.0 49.0 14.6 32.4 Other 50 2.0 60.0 8.0 30.0 --No cases of this type occurred. *Includes 5 cases for which jurisdiction could not be determined. Data source: Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, appellate data file (1995). Nearly equal proportions of appeals involving Federal and State inmates were disposed of without oral hearings -- 94.4% and 93.5%, respectively. Petitions involving State inmates, however, were more likely than those involving Federal inmates to be terminated on jurisdictional or procedural bases: approximately 51.8% of petitions from State inmates were terminated on jurisdictional or procedural bases compared with 31.8% of Federal petitions. Habeas corpus petitions -- especially those from inmates on death row -- were the most likely to be held for oral hearings (table 10). During 1995 approximately 11% of all habeas corpus petitions involving Federal and State inmates were disposed of following an oral hearing, compared to 6.9% or less of other types of petitions (not shown in a table). Disposition ************ Of the 14,333 prisoner petitions terminated in U.S. courts of appeal during 1995, the courts dismissed 52.4% of the cases, affirmed the district courts' decision in 41.7% of the cases, and reversed or remanded the case to the district court (at least in part) in 5.6% of the cases (table 11). Table 11. Disposition of prisoner petitions terminated in U.S. courts of appeal, 1995 Percent of cases ----------------------------------------------------------- Terminated on the merits ----------------------------------------------- Jurisdiction and Partial type of petition Number Dismissed Affirmed part Reversed Remanded Other ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Total* 14,333 52.4% 41.7% 2.8% 2.0% .8% .2% Federal 3,151 37.0% 58.0% 2.2% 1.7% .9% .2% Vacate sentence 1,973 31.5 63.5 2.2 2.0 .7 .1 Habeas corpus 426 49.8 44.1 3.3 1.2 1.6 -- Death penalty 0 -- -- -- -- -- -- Other 426 49.8 44.1 3.3 1.2 1.6 -- Civil rights 530 49.6 45.5 2.3 1.3 .6 .8 Other 222 30.6 66.2 .5 .9 1.8 -- State 11,177 56.7% 37.1% 3.0% 2.1% .8% .3 Habeas corpus 3,957 62.2 31.5 3.7 1.5 .8 .3 Death penalty 121 14.0 49.6 17.4 17.4 -- 1.7 Other 3,836 63.7 31.0 3.3 1.0 .8 .2 Civil rights 7,170 53.8 40.1 2.5 2.5 .8 .2 Other 50 46.0 48.0 6.0 -- -- -- *Includes 5 cases for which jurisdiction could not be determined. --No cases of this type occurred. Data source: Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, appellate data file (1995). Appeals involving State inmates were more likely to be dismissed than those involving Federal inmates. During 1995, approximately 57% of appeals involving State inmates were dismissed compared to 37% of those involving Federal inmates. However, of those cases terminated on their merits, the courts of appeal found an error in nearly twice as many cases involving State inmates as Federal inmates: 13.6% of the appeals involving State inmates were either reversed or remanded compared to 7.6% of the appeals involving Federal inmates (not shown in a table). The courts of appeal most often overruled the decisions of the district courts in habeas corpus cases. Of those cases for which there was a judgment during 1995, 21.1% of habeas corpus cases involving Federal inmates and 19% of those involving State inmates were reversed or remanded, at least in part. Conversely, those cases addressing the constitutionality of Federal prison sentences were the most likely (92%) to be affirmed on appeal (not shown in a table). Case processing time ********************** Appeals involving prisoner petitions terminated during 1995 took approximately 6 months (191 days), on average, to process (table 12). Half of the cases, however, took less than 5 months (144 days). Appeals involving Federal inmates took slightly longer than those involving State inmates -- 222 days for Federal inmates compared with to 182 days for State inmates. The longer case processing time for Federal petitions reflects, in part, the longer case processing time (237 days, on average) for petitions challenging the sentence imposed. Table 12. Case processing time for prisoner petitions terminated in U.S. courts of appeal, 1985 Days between filing and termination ------------------------------------------- Percentiles Jurisdiction and --------------------------------- type of petition Number 10th 25th 50th 75th 90th Average ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Total* 14,333 30 72 144 252 403 190.9 Federal 3,151 45 104 184 288 438 221.7 Vacate sentence 1,973 54 120 201 303 457 237.1 Habeas corpus 426 41 89 185 286 475 219.7 Death penalty 0 -- -- -- -- -- -- Other 426 41 89 185 286 475 219.7 Civil rights 530 34 73 138 234 374 178.3 Other 222 52 89 142 265 407 192.6 State 11,177 27 67 133 240 390 182.2 Habeas corpus 3,957 23 66 143 270 415 195.1 Death penalty 121 0 2 282 492 899 340.8 Other 3,836 24 67 142 264 407 190.5 Civil rights 7,170 29 68 127 227 373 175.2 Other 50 23 75 126 201 362 163.5 *Includes 5 cases for which jurisdiction could not be determined. -- No cases of this type occurred. Data source: Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, civil data file (1995). Generally, appeals involving civil rights petitions took the least amount of time to process, on average: 178 days for Federal petitions and 175 days for State petitions. Ten percent of these cases took about a month to conclude. While those petitions that were dismissed because of jurisdictional or procedural issues took the least amount of time to process, these cases were on the courts' docket for almost 4 months (116 days), on average (not shown in a table). Those cases that required oral hearings took the longest to process -- more than a year, on average. Similar to the differences at the district court level, cases where counsel represented the inmate took much longer to process than those in which the inmates represented themselves. During 1995, cases in which counsel represented the inmate took about 50% longer (279 days, on average) to process than those in which the inmate represented himself (180 days) (not shown in table). ---------------------------------------------------- Background information: Types of prisoner petitions ---------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------- Types of prisoner petitions ---------------------------- Pursuant to Federal law, Federal and State inmates are able to file suits in the Federal courts to: (1) challenge the constitutionality of their imprisonment (habeas corpus); (2) redress civil rights violations by government officials; (3) compel government officials to perform a duty owed to the petitioner (mandamus); and, (4) in the case of Federal inmates, to challenge the constitutionality of the sentence imposed. (Although not addressed in this report, Federal inmates may also file claims against prison administrators and guards under the Federal Tort Claims Act (United States v. Muniz (1963).) Claims filed pursuant to this act, however, are limited to those seeking to redress damages or injuries arising from administrative negligence.) (28 U.S.C.  2674.) --------------- Habeas corpus --------------- The writ of habeas corpus allows Federal and State inmates to file petitions in the Federal courts challenging the constitutionality of their imprisonment. The basic principle of the habeas corpus writ is that the government is accountable to the courts for a person's imprisonment. If the government cannot show that the imprisonment conforms with the fundamental requirements of law, the person is entitled to immediate release (Fay v. Noia, 372 U.S. 391 (1963).) Habeas corpus petitions were originally authorized in the U.S. Constitution and were subsequently included in the Judiciary Act of 1789 (U.S. Const. art. I,  9, cl. 2; Judiciary Act of 1789, Ch. 20, 1 Stat. 73 as codified at 28 U.S.C.  2241.) The Judiciary Act, as amended, provides that the Federal courts shall have the power to grant writs of habeas corpus in all cases where the person was restrained in violation of the Constitution or any law of the United States and under the authority of the United States. While the Judiciary Act only authorized the Federal courts to hear habeas corpus petitions filed by Federal prisoners, subsequent legislation extended the writ to prisoners held by the States (28 U.S.C.  2254.) However, State inmates are required to exhaust all remedies available to them at the State level before filing a petition at the Federal level (28 U.S.C.  2254(b).) The Supreme Court has generally held that so long as there are no procedural impediments, as defined by statute, an inmate can raise most constitutional or jurisdictional claims in a habeas petition (Brown v. Allen, 344 U.S. 443 (1953).) The Court, however, has restricted the use of habeas corpus to raise constitutional claims -- such as fourth amendment claims of illegally seized evidence -- that could have been adjudicated either at trial or on direct appellate review (Stone v. Powell, 428 U.S. 465 (1976).) Previous BJS reports indicated that "ineffective assistance of counsel" was the most frequently cited reason for habeas corpus petitions filed by State inmates -- 25% of habeas corpus petitions cited ineffective counsel as the basis for the petition. Other commonly cited reasons include errors by the trial court (15%), due process (14%), and self-incrimination (12%) (Roger A. Hanson and Henry W.K. Daley, Federal Habeas Corpus Review BJS Discussion Paper, NCJ-155504 (1995).) In concordance with Stone v. Powell, Fourth amendment claims of illegal search and seizure are infrequent -- 5% of habeas corpus petitions surveyed cited illegal search and seizure as the basis of the petition (Ibid.) Civil rights ************** Federal and State inmates may file suits in the Federal courts alleging civil rights violations by government officials. The foundation for these petitions originates in the 14th amendment to the U.S. Constitution. The 14th amendment prohibits the States from "depriv[ing] any person from life, liberty, or property without due process of law."( U.S. Const. amend. XIV,  1.) The Civil Rights Act of 1871 provided the mechanism for persons to seek relief from constitutional deprivations. Pursuant to 42 U.S.C.  1983, State officials can be held liable for the deprivation of any civil rights secured by the Constitution. While this act did not address violations by Federal officials, in 1971 the Supreme Court extended the Civil Rights Act to cover violations by Federal officials (Bivens v. Six Unknown Agents of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971).) Prison inmates, despite being expli-citly denied certain rights such as freedom of movement and freedom from unreasonable searches and seizures, do retain certain civil rights (Cooper v. Pate, 378 U.S. 546 (1964).) The Supreme Court has held that to some extent, inmates continue to enjoy the rights of religious freedom, (Cruz v. Beto, 405 U.S. 319 (1972).) speech, (Pell v. Procunier, 417 U.S. 817 (1974).) association, (Jones v. North Carolina Prisoners' Labor Union, 433 U.S. 119 (1977).) and due process (Wolff v. McDonnell, 418 U.S. 539 (1978).) And, to a greater extent, they enjoy the right to be free from racial discrimination (Lee v. Washington, 390 U.S. 333 (1968).) and cruel andunusual punishment (Rhodes v. Chapman, 452 U.S. 337 (1981).) Recognizing that access to the courts by inmates is necessary for the protection of these rights, the Supreme Court has ruled that inmates are not barred from bringing lawsuits against government officials (See, Ex parte Hull, 312 U.S. 546 (1941) and United States v. Muniz, 374 U.S. 150 (1963).) Since this decision, the Supreme Court has ruled on many cases defining the scope of inmates' rights and their ability to use the courts. Previous BJS reports indicated that physical security (21%), medical treatment (17%), and due process (13%) are the most frequently cited issues in civil rights petitions filed by State inmates. Issues such as freedom of religious expression (4%), living conditions (4%), and assaults by guards (3%) are relatively infrequent (Roger A. Hanson and Henry W. K. Daley, Challenging the Conditions of Prisons and Jails, BJS Discussion Paper, NCJ-151652, 1995.) (Data describing the specific issues were not available in the datasets used for this report.) In 1980, Congress enacted the Civil Rights of Institutionalized Persons Act (CRIPA) (Pub. L. No.: 96-247, 97 Stat. 349 (1980) (codified in scattered sections of 42 U.S.C.).) This act sought to reduce the number of civil rights petitions filed in the Federal courts by requiring inmates to exhaust State-level administrative remedies before filing their petitions in the Federal courts (42 U.S.C.  1997e.) By requiring inmates to exhaust the available administrative remedies, Congress sought to reserve the Federal courts for more serious civil rights violations or other significant constitutional issues. Further, to ensure that civil rights petitions are handled consistently across States and institutions, the Act requires that the institution's administrative procedures be certified by either the Department of Justice or the local Federal district court. Inmates in facilities not certified are not required to exhaust the institutional-level procedures before filing a petition in Federal court. Mandamus ********** The writ of mandamus is a judicial remedy used to compel a lower court or government officer to perform a duty owed to the plaintiff (28 U.S.C.  1361.) Like habeas corpus, mandamus is an extraordinary remedy, based in common law, that is only used when the plaintiff has no other adequate means to attain the desired relief (Ex parte Fahey, 332 U.S. 258 (1947). ) However, the courts have held that mandamus can only be used to compel a government official to perform a ministerial or nondiscretionary duty ( Marquez-Ramos v. Reno, 69 F.3d 477 (1995).) Additionally, the Federal courts do not have jurisdiction to issue writs compelling action by State courts and officials (See, Gurley v. Superior Court of Mecklenburg County, 411 F.2d 586 (4th Cir. 1969).) Consequently, mandamus petitions are often dismissed: during 1995, more than 70% of mandamus petitions filed by Federal and State inmates were dismissed (table 5). Compared to other prisoner petitions, mandamus petitions are infrequent. Mandamus petitions tend to be varied in nature and specific to individual circumstances. The courts have granted mandamus for limited uses such as the following: to direct lower courts to hear and decide pending cases in a timely manner, ( See, Johnson v.Rogers, 917 F.2d 1283 (10th Cir. 1990) but, see, In Re Hinton, 61 F.3d 900, 1995 WL 417865 (4th Cir.).) to permit inmates to file petitions in forma pauperis or pro se; (In Re Smith, 600 F.2d 714 (8th Cir. 1979); McNeil v. Guthrie, 945 F.2d 1163 (10th Cir. 1991).) to compel the correction of a sentence computation; (Savage v. Henderson, 475 F.2d 78 (5th Cir. 1973); Johnson v. Smith, 696 F.2d 1334 (11th Cir. 1983); Holmes v. U.S. Board of Parole, 541 F.2d 1243 (7th Cir. 1976).) to compel a State to prosecute an inmate while the inmate is in the custody of another jurisdiction; ( Smith v. Hooey, 393 U.S. 374 (1969).) to allow inmates to vote absentee, where permitted by law; ( O'Brien v. Skinner, 414 U.S. 524 (1974).) and, to compel the payment of Federal witness fees to inmates (Demarest v. Manspeaker, 498 U.S. 184 (1991).) ------------------------------------------- Constitutionality of the sentence imposed ------------------------------------------ Federal inmates may file petitions in the Federal courts to have a sentence vacated, set aside, or otherwise corrected upon the ground that the sentence was imposed in violation of the Constitution or other law of the United States, that the sentencing court was without jurisdiction to impose the sentence, or that the sentence was greater than the statutory maximum authorized by law (28 U.S.C.  2255.) The basic principle underlying these petitions is the same as that of habeas corpus: if the imprisonment is unlawful, the inmate is entitled to release (or a corrected sentence). While petitions challenging the sentence imposed are similar in principle to habeas corpus petitions, in 1948, Congress distinguished the two to address practical difficulties that had arisen in administering the habeas corpus jurisdiction of the Federal courts such as: (1) to reduce the number of habeas corpus petitions filed by Federal inmates in those Federal judicial districts where Federal correctional facilities are located; and (2) to address practical considerations such as evidence gathering and production of witnesses (Ibid.) Since habeas corpus petitions pertain to the legality of the imprisonment (including an illegal sentence), inmates are required to file habeas corpus petitions in the judicial district in which they are imprisoned rather than the district in which they were convicted and/or sentenced (Ahrens v. Clark, 335 U.S. 188 (1948).) Prior to the enactment of 28 U.S.C.  2255, the geographical separation of the sentencing court and the Federal prison presented a problem for the Federal courts: habeas corpus petitions were disproportionately concentrated in certain judicial districts. For instance, between 1942 and 1948, 63% of all habeas corpus petitions filed by Federal inmates were filed in 5 (Northern California, Northern Georgia, Kansas, Western Washington, and Western Missouri) of the then 84 Federal judicial districts (William H. Speck, "Statistics on Federal Habeas Corpus," Ohio State Law Journal, vol. 10, 1949, pp. 337-352.) At the request of the Federal judiciary, Congress created a new statute that distinguished petitions challenging the sentence imposed from those that otherwise challenged the constitutionality of the imprisonment (28 U.S.C.  2255. ) This new statute required inmates who challenged the sentence imposed to file the petition in the district in which they were originally sentenced (28 U.S.C.  1651(a).) The remaining habeas corpus cases would continue to be filed in the district in which the inmate was confined. ----------------------------------------------------------------- Recent Federal legislation addressing prisoner petitions Prison Litigation Reform Act (Pub. L. No. 104-134, 110 Stat. 1321 (codified as amended in scattered sections of 18, 28, and 42 U.S.C.). The Prison Litigation Reform Act, enacted in April 1996, requires that before an inmate can file a civil rights action in Federal court the inmate must -- * exhaust all available administrative remedies before filing the case whether or not the facility's grievance procedures were certified by the Department of Justice or the Federal court; and * show physical injury in order to receive damages for mental or emotional injury suffered while in custody. Additionally, the Act generally prohibits an inmate from filing a petition in forma pauperis (as an indigent without liability for court fees and costs) if the inmate has filed three or more actions in Federal court that were dismissed as frivolous or malicious or for failing to state a claim on which relief can be granted. Further, inmates filing petitions in forma pauperis are required to pay the appropriate filing fees (and costs, where applicable) from their existing assets or any funds available to them through their trust fund accounts within the correctional system. This act also provides for sanctions to be imposed on Federal inmates who abuse the court system. The act authorizes the Federal courts to order the revocation of any unvested good time of Federal inmates whose petitions were dismissed because it was filed for malicious purposes, solely to harass the other party, or because the inmate presented false testimony or evidence. Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (Pub. L. No. 104-132, 110 Stat. 1218 (codified as amended in scattered sections of 28 U.S.C.). The Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act, also enacted in April 1996, addresses habeas corpus petitions that are filed in the Federal courts. Like the Prison Litigation Reform Act, this act requires State inmates to exhaust all available remedies at the State level before filing a habeas corpus petition in Federal court. Additionally, the Act establishes a statute of limitation whereby both Federal and State inmates have 1 year from the time their conviction becomes final -- after the direct appeals of their conviction and/or sentence are exhausted -- to file a habeas petition in Federal court. However, if the inmate was provided counsel for any post-conviction proceeding (such as direct appeal of the conviction), then the petition must be filed within 6 months. The act also requires successive petitions to be approved by a panel of the applicable Federal court of appeals. Successive petitions are limited to cases that present newly discovered evidence that would have undermined the jury's verdict or that involve new constitutional rights that have been retroactively applied by the Supreme Court. Additionally, this act defined the Federal courts' ability to adjudicate habeas corpus petitions by State inmates. The Federal courts are required to show deference to the determination of the State courts, provided that these determinations are neither "contrary to" nor an "unreasonable application of" clearly established Federal law as determined by the Supreme Court. ----------------------------------------------------------------- ------------- Methodology ------------- The primary source of data for tables presented in this report is the Federal Judicial Center (FJC) Integrated database. The Integrated Database is composed of the criminal, civil, and appellate data files maintained by the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts. These data are archived at the National Archive of Criminal Justice Data by the FJC (ICPSR 8429). Data tabulations, except where otherwise noted, were prepared from BJS staff analysis of these databases. Time-series data were compiled from the annual reports of the Judicial Conference of the United States. Prior to 1992, the period reported by the Judicial Conference was July 1 through June 30; beginning in 1992, however, the reporting period was changed to October 1 through September 30 to correspond to the Federal fiscal year. No effort was made to correct for the missing 3 months (7/92 to 9/92) of data. ************** END OF FILE **************