S. 2760Senate108th Congress (2003-2005)In Committee

Public Safety Officers' Defense Act

Sponsored by Jon KylSen. Jon Kyl (R-AZ)
Introduced July 22, 2004

Legislative Activity

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

1 earlier action
SenateIntro Referral Latest Action

Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.

July 22, 2004

View full timeline
SenateIntro Referral

Introduced in Senate

July 22, 2004

SenateIntro Referral

Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.

July 22, 2004

Floor Debate

3 members

What members said about S. 2760 on the floor

3 Republicans
Susan M. Collins
Sen. Susan M. CollinsR-ME · Sep 30, 2004

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, September 30 at 10:30 a.m. to receive…

Susan M. Collins
Sen. Susan M. CollinsR-ME · Oct 4, 2004

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on the Judiciary be authorized to meet to continue its markup of Thursday, September 30, 2004 on Monday, October 4, 2004 immediately…

Mitch McConnell
Sen. Mitch McConnellR-KY · Oct 7, 2004

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on October 7, 2004, at a time to be determined,…

Jon Kyl
Sen. Jon KylR-AZ · Sep 21, 2004

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the following letter be printed in the Record. The letter expresses the strong support of the Fraternal Order of Police for S. 2760, the Public Safety…

Bill Text

Latest available legislative text

Reading Mode
Latest
Introduced in SenateIssued July 22, 2004
        [Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2760 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

108th CONGRESS
2d Session
S. 2760

To limit and expedite Federal collateral review of convictions for
killing a public safety officer.

_______________________________________________________________________

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

July 22, 2004

Mr. Kyl (for himself, Mr. Hatch, Mr. Craig, Mr. Cornyn, and Mr.
Sessions) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and
referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

A BILL

To limit and expedite Federal collateral review of convictions for
killing a public safety officer.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the ``Public Safety Officers' Defense
Act''.

SEC. 2. SUBSTANTIVE LIMITS.

Section 2254 of title 28, United States Code, is amended by adding
at the end the following:
``(j) Crimes Against Public Safety Officer.--
``(1) Definition of public safety officer.--In this
subsection, the term `public safety officer' has the meaning
given such term in section 1204 of the Omnibus Crime Control
and Safe Streets Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 3796b).
``(2) In general.--A court, justice, or judge shall not
have jurisdiction to consider any claim relating to the
judgment or sentence in an application described under
paragraph (3), unless the applicant shows that the claim
qualifies for consideration on the grounds described in
subsection (e)(2). Any such application that is presented to a
court, justice, or judge other than a district court shall be
transferred to the appropriate district court for consideration
or dismissal in conformity with this subsection, except that a
court of appeals panel must authorize any second or successive
application in conformity with section 2244 prior to any
consideration by the district court.
``(3) Application of subsection.--This subsection shall
apply to an application for a writ of habeas corpus on behalf
of a person in custody pursuant to the judgment of a State
court for a crime that involved the killing of a public safety
officer while the public safety officer was engaged in the
performance of official duties, or on account of the public
safety officer's performance of official duties.''.

SEC. 3. TIME LIMITS.

Section 2254(j) of title 28, United States Code, as added by
section 2 of this Act, is further amended by adding at the end the
following:
``(4) Time limits in district court.--For any application
described under paragraph (3), in the district court the
following shall apply:
``(A) Any motion by either party for an evidentiary
hearing shall be filed and served not later than 90
days after the State files its answer or, if no timely
answer is filed, the date on which such answer is due.
``(B) Any motion for an evidentiary hearing shall
be granted or denied not later than 30 days after the
date on which the party opposing such motion files a
pleading in opposition to such motion or, if no timely
pleading in opposition is filed, the date on which such
pleading in opposition is due.
``(C) Any evidentiary hearing shall be--
``(i) convened not less than 60 days after
the order granting such hearing; and
``(ii) completed not more than 150 days
after the order granting such hearing.
``(D) A district court shall enter a final order,
granting or denying the application for a writ of
habeas corpus, not later than 15 months after the date
on which the State files its answer or, if no timely
answer is filed, the date on which such answer is due,
or not later than 60 days after the case is submitted
for decision, whichever is earlier.
``(E) If the district court fails to comply with
the requirements of this paragraph, the State may
petition the court of appeals for a writ of mandamus to
enforce the requirements. The court of appeals shall
grant or deny the petition for a writ of mandamus not
later than 30 days after such petition is filed with
the court.
``(5) Time limits in court of appeals.--For any application
described under paragraph (3), in the court of appeals the
following shall apply:
``(A) A timely filed notice of appeal from an order
issuing a writ of habeas corpus shall operate as a stay
of that order pending final disposition of the appeal.
``(B) The court of appeals shall decide the appeal
from an order granting or denying a writ of habeas
corpus--
``(i) not later than 120 days after the
date on which the brief of the appellee is
filed or, if no timely brief is filed, the date
on which such brief is due; or
``(ii) if a cross-appeal is filed, not
later than 120 days after the date on which the
appellant files a brief in response to the
issues presented by the cross-appeal or, if no
timely brief is filed, the date on which such
brief is due.
``(C)(i) Following a decision by a panel of the
court of appeals under subparagraph (B), a petition for
panel rehearing is not allowed, but rehearing by the
court of appeals en banc may be requested. The court of
appeals shall decide whether to grant a petition for
rehearing en banc not later than 30 days after the date
on which the petition is filed, unless a response is
required, in which case the court shall decide whether
to grant the petition not later than 30 days after the
date on which the response is filed or, if no timely
response is filed, the date on which the response is
due.
``(ii) If rehearing en banc is granted, the court
of appeals shall make a final determination of the
appeal not later than 120 days after the date on which
the order granting rehearing en banc is entered.
``(D) If the court of appeals fails to comply with
the requirements of this paragraph, the State may
petition the Supreme Court or a justice thereof for a
writ of mandamus to enforce the requirements.
``(6) Application of time limits.--
``(A) In general.--The time limitations under
paragraphs (4) and (5) shall apply to an initial
application described under paragraph (3), any second
or successive application described under paragraph
(3), and any redetermination of an application
described under paragraph (3) or related appeal
following a remand by the court of appeals or the
Supreme Court for further proceedings.
``(B) Remand in district court.--In proceedings
following remand in the district court, time limits
running from the time the State files its answer under
paragraph (4) shall run from the date the remand is
ordered if further briefing is not required in the
district court. If there is further briefing following
remand in the district court, such time limits shall
run from the date on which a responsive brief is filed
or, if no timely responsive brief is filed, the date on
which such brief is due.
``(C) Remand in court of appeals.--In proceedings
following remand in the court of appeals, the time
limit specified in paragraph (5)(B) shall run from the
date the remand is ordered if further briefing is not
required in the court of appeals. If there is further
briefing in the court of appeals, the time limit
specified in paragraph (5)(B) shall run from the date
on which a responsive brief is filed or, if no timely
responsive brief is filed, from the date on which such
brief is due.
``(7) Failure to comply.--The failure of a court to meet or
comply with a time limitation under this subsection shall not
be a ground for granting relief from a judgment of conviction
or sentence, nor shall the time limitations under this
subsection be construed to entitle a capital applicant to a
stay of execution, to which the applicant would otherwise not
be entitled, for the purpose of litigating any application or
appeal.''.

SEC. 4. APPLICATION TO PENDING CASES.

(a) In General.--The amendments made by this Act shall apply to
cases pending on or after the date of enactment of this Act.
(b) Time Limits.--In a case pending on the date of enactment of
this Act, if the amendments made by this Act provide that a time limit
runs from an event or time that has occurred prior to such date of
enactment, the time limit shall run instead from such date of
enactment.
<all>