A.  Habeas Corpus substantially eroded by Anti-Terrorism & Effective Death Penalty Act (ATEDA 1996).
a.  before, habeas a safety valve if something wrong with state prosecution re. Constitutional rights, federal courts could correct (usually by a new trial)
b.  now, before get to merits of claim have to overcome incredibly complex procedural hurdles
B.  State System:
a.  State District Ct. ( Court of Appeal ( Court of Criminal Appeals – - – > USSC (Const. ?)
b.  Increasing court specialization by area
c.  Death cases – “appeal as of right”, bypass Court of Appeals and go to Court of Criminal Appeals
C.  Federal System:     U.S. District Ct. ( U.S. Ct. of Appeals – - – > USSC (can apply for cert.)
D.  Increase in types of crimes federalized (though still 90% in state court); increase # of federal judges
Some overlap … identical crimes sometimes tried in either state or federal court, or both (ex. drugs)
E.  Habeas Corpus:  where federal and state systems intersect
D has exhausted state remedies (first make claim in state court system… state habeas corpus; must give state opportunity to correct)
D is in custody (probation counts)
Raised federal Constitutional issue
…now can go into Federal District Court
Goal:  release from custody unless retry with proper procedures