H.Amdt. 532House109th Congress (2005-2007)

An amendment numbered 13 printed in the Congressional Record to provide that fact-intensive and time-consuming "harmless-error sentencing claims" will be reviewed again in Federal court only if the State court erred in determining that the claim was subject to harmlessness review.

What it does: 2 changes: strikes text, inserts text
Sponsored by Jeff FlakeRep. Jeff Flake (R-AZ)
Submitted September 14, 2005

Description

Amendment limits harmless error sentencing claims in Federal courts.

What it changes

2 changes to H.R. 3132

Strikes textInserts text

We couldn't read part of this amendment. That part is shown as written below.

  1. Change 1: Strikes the closing quotation marks and period at the end of page 42, line 6

    …[struck: ".]

    Original wording

    Page 42, line 6, strike the close quotation mark and the period

  2. Change 2: Inserts new text on page 42, line 6

    Inserted: (k) Sentencing Claims.--A court, justice, or judge shall not have jurisdiction to consider an application with respect to an error relating to the applicant's sentence or sentencing that has been found to be harmless or not prejudicial in State court proceedings, or that was found by a State court to be procedurally barred, unless a determination that the error is not structural is contrary to clearly established Federal law, as determined by the Supreme Court of the United States.

    Original wording

    Page 42, after line 6, insert the following:

Shown as written

that follows.

Read automatically from the Congressional Record. Check the original before relying on it.

As printed

Page 42, line 6, strike the close quotation mark and the period that follows.

Page 42, after line 6, insert the following:

“(k) Sentencing Claims.--A court, justice, or judge shall not have jurisdiction to consider an application with respect to an error relating to the applicant's sentence or sentencing that has been found to be harmless or not prejudicial in State court proceedings, or that was found by a State court to be procedurally barred, unless a determination that the error is not structural is contrary to clearly established Federal law, as determined by the Supreme Court of the United States.”.

Legislative Activity

Stay on top of the latest movement without scrolling through every action

5 earlier actions
Floor Latest Action

House amendment offered

September 14, 2005

View full timeline
Floor

House amendment offered

September 14, 2005

Not Used

Amendment agreed to Committee of the Whole

September 14, 2005 • 1:40 PM

Floor

House amendment agreed to: On agreeing to the Flake amendment (A013) Agreed to by voice vote.

September 14, 2005 • 1:40 PM

Not Used

House amendment offered/reported by : Amendment (A013) offered by Mr. Flake.(consideration: CR H7906-7908; text: CR H7906)

September 14, 2005 • 1:36 PM

Floor

Amendment (A013) offered by Mr. Flake. (consideration: CR H7906-7908; text: CR H7906)

September 14, 2005 • 1:36 PM

Floor

On agreeing to the Flake amendment (A013) Agreed to by voice vote.

September 14, 2005 • 1:40 PM