252 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 657 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort
-
The Ninth Circuit vacated and remanded the district court's denial of habeas relief, finding a potential conflict with prior precedent regarding juror misconduct. The court held that a remand was necessary for a factual determination of whether a juror had informed others of the
-
985 F.2d 425·
8th Cir.·
1993-02-05
The court held that a notice of appeal filed before the disposition of a timely Rule 59(e) motion is premature, and the appeal must be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.
-
The court held that where the record is ambiguous regarding the trial court's evaluation of a prosecutor's race-neutral explanations for peremptory strikes, a federal court must defer to the state appellate court's factual findings.
-
The court held that state laws requiring corroboration of accomplice testimony do not raise constitutional issues for federal habeas review, and that the evidence was sufficient to meet federal constitutional standards for guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
-
The court held that the habeas petitioner's incriminating statements were voluntarily made and not obtained in violation of Miranda, as she was not in custody during the interviews.
-
The court held that the evidence was insufficient to support a finding beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant intended to aid in the killing that occurred.
-
The court affirmed the denial of the habeas petition, finding no constitutional violation regarding ex parte jury communications, state suppression of evidence, or ineffective assistance of counsel.
-
The court held that the petitioner's counsel provided ineffective assistance by failing to adequately investigate and present independent psychiatric evidence regarding the petitioner's mental state during the penalty phase of his capital murder trial.
-
The dissenting judge would reverse the denial of the writ of habeas corpus and discharge the petitioners.
-
The court held that the jury instructions did not improperly shift the burden of proof to the defendant and that sufficient evidence supported the conviction.
-
960 F.2d 663·
7th Cir.·
1992-04-03
A prisoner challenging the procedures used to consider his parole application, rather than the legality of his confinement, does not need to exhaust state remedies before filing a federal suit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
-
960 F.2d 718·
8th Cir.·
1992-03-16
The court held that the prisoner's habeas corpus petition was properly denied as moot because he had received all the relief he requested, including a hearing and release on parole.
-
957 F.2d 1544·
9th Cir.·
1992-02-28
Excluding evidence of M.G.'s prior sexual conduct did not violate Wood's Sixth Amendment rights because the evidence was not relevant or its probative value was outweighed by prejudicial effect and other legitimate interests.
-
The court held that a prisoner's belief that supernatural intervention will prevent his execution does not render him incompetent to be executed under the Ford v. Wainwright standard.
-
The court held that the prosecutor's conduct, while reprehensible, was not intended to provoke the defendant into moving for a mistrial, thus double jeopardy does not bar retrial.
-
The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction and that the admission of the defendant's notes did not violate due process.
-
930 F.2d 838·
11th Cir.·
1991-05-06
The court held that even if the Jefferson County juvenile statute was unconstitutional, the appellant suffered no prejudice and his prior convictions were validly used for sentence enhancement.
-
932 F.2d 713·
8th Cir.·
1991-05-03
The court held that a defendant's claim of ineffective assistance of counsel for failing to timely file a motion for a new trial fails if the defendant initially did not wish to appeal, and that a claim of attorney's failure to investigate competency is rejected if the state cour
-
921 F.2d 247·
9th Cir.·
1990-12-27
The court affirmed the conviction, finding that while the prosecutor's secret deal was objectionable, there was no reasonable probability that its disclosure would have changed the trial's outcome.
-
915 F.2d 368·
8th Cir.·
1990-09-27
The court held that the petitioner did not receive constitutionally ineffective assistance of counsel and that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying a continuance.
-
910 F.2d 66·
2d Cir.·
1990-08-01
The court held that a prisoner's petition seeking a transfer of custody, even if framed as a challenge to conditions of confinement, must be treated as a petition for a writ of habeas corpus if the requested relief would require prison officials to cede custody.
-
902 F.2d 9·
8th Cir.·
1990-04-26
The court held that a state court's factual findings regarding a guilty plea are presumed correct and that a habeas petitioner's claims contradicting his statements at the plea hearing are insufficient to warrant relief.
-
The court held that the petitioner was denied effective assistance of counsel at the sentencing phase because his trial counsel failed to investigate and present available mitigating evidence, and this deficiency prejudiced the outcome of the sentencing proceeding.
-
859 F.2d 526·
7th Cir.·
1988-10-07
The court held that the inadvertent mention of a withdrawn guilty plea, followed by a curative instruction, did not violate the defendant's due process rights or Fifth Amendment privilege, and any error was harmless.
-
851 F.2d 324·
10th Cir.·
1988-07-07
The court held that the district court did not err in denying the motion to withdraw the habeas petition and in dismissing the petition with prejudice, as the withdrawal motion was untimely and addressed to the court's discretion.
-
A subsequent diagnosis of mental illness does not automatically entitle a habeas petitioner to an evidentiary hearing if the record, including prior competency evaluations and the plea colloquy, does not clearly and substantially raise doubt about competency at the time of the pl
-
The court affirmed the denial of the habeas corpus petition, holding that the in-court identifications were reliable under the totality of the circumstances.
-
The court held that the petitioner's claims of actual conflict of interest from joint representation, prosecutorial misconduct, and ineffective assistance of counsel did not warrant habeas corpus relief because he failed to demonstrate prejudice or constitutional violations.
-
The court held that the lack of notice to the juvenile offender's parents regarding his arrest and arraignment violates due process and renders his guilty plea involuntary, requiring the conviction to be vacated.
-
The court held that the petitioner failed to demonstrate a constitutional violation regarding the grand jury's fair cross-section or due process claims, affirming the denial of his habeas corpus petition.
-
The court held that the federal district court erred by applying the presumption of correctness under 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d) to the state court's determination of confession voluntariness, which requires independent federal review.
-
The court held that the admission of the inculpatory statement was not a violation of the petitioner's right to counsel, and any potential error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.
-
746 F.2d 1367·
8th Cir.·
1984-10-30
The court held that a guilty plea is not rendered involuntary by the failure of a trial judge to explain parole eligibility, absent evidence of attorney misrepresentation.
-
The court held that the petitioner may be entitled to a writ of habeas corpus if, on remand, he can show that his trial counsel's failure to investigate the incapacitating effect of the victim's heart wound was unreasonable and that material facts were not developed due to no ine
-
728 F.2d 1149·
8th Cir.·
1984-03-06
The court held that the undisclosed witness statement was not material to guilt or punishment, and therefore its suppression did not violate due process. The court also affirmed the lower court's finding that there was no prejudicial contact between the victim's relatives and the
-
The court held that the petitioner's prosecution for aggravated battery after an ex parte judgment on an ordinance violation constituted double jeopardy because the offenses were the same and the ex parte judgment was criminal punishment.
-
The court held that the district court correctly found ineffective assistance of counsel, as the state court's contrary findings were not supported by the record.
-
The Sixth Circuit held that the district court erred in granting habeas corpus relief because the state court's determination that no second competency hearing was warranted was not an unreasonable application of federal law.
-
The court held that the district court's dismissal of the habeas petition was proper, affirming the denial of relief on both ineffective assistance of counsel and jury instruction claims.
-
The court held that the district court erred by granting habeas relief without considering the presumption of correctness afforded state court factual determinations under 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d).
-
The court held that the district court's dismissal of the habeas petition was proper, affirming the denial of relief on the claims of involuntary guilty plea and unconstitutional sentencing statute.
-
545 F.2d 460·
5th Cir.·
1977-01-14
The court held that the denial of the motion for a continuance raised a substantial claim of ineffective assistance of counsel requiring an evidentiary hearing, but the denial of the motion for a mental examination did not violate federal constitutional rights regarding competenc
-
540 F.2d 921·
8th Cir.·
1976-08-09
The court held that the petitioner's claims are frivolous, thus denying his request for appointed counsel and dismissing the appeal.
-
The court held that the district court's finding that the petitioner was advised of his right to appeal was not clearly erroneous, and thus affirmed the dismissal of the habeas corpus petition.
-
A federal court is not precluded from holding an evidentiary hearing in a habeas corpus proceeding, even if state court findings are presumed correct under 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d), if the state court did not make a determination after a hearing on the merits of a factual issue.
-
-
The court held that the photographic identification and the victim's extended interaction with the officer provided a sufficient independent basis for the in-court identification, thus the denial of the habeas corpus petition was proper.
-
The court held that the district court did not err in denying the petition for a writ of habeas corpus, as the state court's findings regarding the understanding and voluntariness of the guilty plea were supported by the record.
-
-
438 F.2d 326·
8th Cir.·
1971-02-25
The court held that the South Dakota statute limiting defenses for embezzlement does not unconstitutionally deprive an accused of a jury trial on the issue of intent to convert property.