House approves measure to tighten post-conviction review in death-penalty cases

The Utah House on Feb. 1 passed House Bill 202, a measure the sponsor described as the culmination of a two‑year effort to speed post‑conviction processing in capital cases while preserving fairness.

Representative McKiff, the bill sponsor, told colleagues the legislation authorizes a single, additional post‑conviction review in death‑penalty cases during which appointed counsel — new counsel certified in death‑penalty cases and paid at state expense — may examine prior proceedings and raise any claims that exist. McKiff said the change is intended to reduce “additional stays of execution” that can prolong resolution for decades while retaining safeguards for defendants.

The bill requires that defendants raise every available claim at that first post‑conviction review or forfeit the right to raise it later, unless the court finds the claim is newly discovered evidence or otherwise meets the specified exceptions. McKiff said the statute still allows for a court to grant a stay if the court preliminarily finds the new claim has potential merit and there is insufficient time to resolve it before a scheduled execution.

During floor debate, Representative King said the bill “accelerates the process of killing people who have killed people,” framing the measure as a moral as well as procedural change. King said he was “torn” and would not yet announce his vote. Several other representatives asked detailed questions about how the bill would handle newly discovered evidence and whether defense counsel had been consulted; McKiff said he had withdrawn the proposal during interim work to meet with defense attorneys and make changes informed by their comments.

On the question of innocence claims, McKiff said House Bill 202 would not bar exonerations based on DNA evidence and pointed to a separate statute governing DNA‑based claims. He also noted federal judicial practice and the Utah Supreme Court’s authority to appoint counsel if a meritorious claim appears.

The House closed debate and voted. The reading clerk announced that House Bill 202 received 67 yes votes and 5 no votes; the bill was transmitted to the Senate for consideration.

What happens next: The bill will go to the Senate for its committee referral and consideration. Sponsor statements on the House floor said the measure was developed with input from the attorney general’s office, the courts and the Constitutional Revision Commission; opponents warned that limiting post‑conviction avenues risks mistakes in the most severe of punishments.

Vote tally: House Bill 202 — Passed 67 yes, 5 no.