This website will be unavailable from Friday, April 26, 2024 at 6:00 p.m. through Monday, April 29, 2024 at 7:00 a.m. due to data center maintenance.

	
Amend CSSB 1976 (Senate committee printing) by striking all 
below the enacting clause and substituting the following:

	SECTION 1.  Section 4(a), Article 11.07, Code of Criminal 
Procedure, is amended to read as follows:
	(a)  If a subsequent application for writ of habeas corpus is 
filed after final disposition of an initial application challenging 
the same conviction, a court may not consider the merits of or grant 
relief based on the subsequent application unless the application 
contains sufficient specific facts establishing that:
		(1)  the current claims and issues, including a claim 
that scientific evidence presented at trial has been discredited,
have not been and could not have been presented previously in an 
original application or in a previously considered application 
filed under this article because the factual or legal basis for the 
claim was unavailable on the date the applicant filed the previous 
application; or
		(2)  by a preponderance of the evidence, but for a 
violation of the United States Constitution no rational juror could 
have found the applicant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
	SECTION 2.  Section 5(a), Article 11.071, Code of Criminal 
Procedure, is amended to read as follows:
	(a)  If a subsequent application for a writ of habeas corpus 
is filed after filing an initial application, a court may not 
consider the merits of or grant relief based on the subsequent 
application unless the application contains sufficient specific 
facts establishing that:
		(1)  the current claims and issues, including a claim 
that scientific evidence presented at trial has been discredited,
have not been and could not have been presented previously in a 
timely initial application or in a previously considered 
application filed under this article or Article 11.07 because the 
factual or legal basis for the claim was unavailable on the date the 
applicant filed the previous application;
		(2)  by a preponderance of the evidence, but for a 
violation of the United States Constitution no rational juror could 
have found the applicant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt; or
		(3)  by clear and convincing evidence, but for a 
violation of the United States Constitution no rational juror would 
have answered in the state's favor one or more of the special issues 
that were submitted to the jury in the applicant's trial under 
Article 37.071, 37.0711, or 37.072.
	SECTION 3.  The change in law made by this Act applies only 
to an application for a writ of habeas corpus filed on or after the 
effective date of this Act.  An application for a writ of habeas 
corpus filed before the effective date of this Act is governed by 
the law in effect at the time the application was filed, and the 
former law is continued in effect for that purpose.
	SECTION 4.  This Act takes effect September 1, 2009.