Writ of Habeas Corpus

The term “habeas corpus” is a Latin phrase meaning “we command you to release the body.”  A Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, therefore, is an action against the warden of a prison for holding a prisoner without legal cause in violation of the United States Constitution. 

Unlike a direct appeal which limits review to the four corners of a record, habeas petitions often rely on facts discovered after trial which expose the trial’s constitutional infirmities.  The most common issues raised in a habeas petition are ineffective assistance of counsel and prosecutorial misconduct often referred to a Brady claim. 

Ineffective assistance of counsel (referred to as “IAC”) results when trial counsel’s performance falls below a reasonable standard of care and, but for this deficient performance, the trial would have resulted in a more favorable result to the defendant.  Traditionally, IAC claims consist of trial counsel’s failure to call a particular witness, retain a certain expert, collect material documentary evidence, and/or make a pertinent legal argument or objection.  For this reason, preparing a habeas petition often requires extensive investigation and can be very costly.  In a cursory sense, a habeas petition depicts, on paper, what the trial that should looked like had been conducted properly in the first place.  

In the course of a habeas investigation, The Legal Appeals Group may discover that a witness provided favorable information to the police which was never turned over to the defense before trial.  Where this information would have been material to the defense, this type of new evidence will support a Brady claim supporting a case for a new trial on habeas.  Brady claims are named after the landmark United States Supreme Court case Brady v. Maryland which provided that the prosecution has a constitutional duty to disclose all exculpatory evidence to the defense before trial.