28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition

174 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · browse and sort

• Nance v. Warden, Georgia Diagnostic Prison
  922 F.3d 1298· 11th Cir.· 2019-04-30 ·cited 206×
  The Eleventh Circuit affirmed the district court's denial of the habeas petition, finding that the state court's decisions were not contrary to clearly established federal law or based on an unreasonable determination of facts.
• Wyndel R. Hall v. Sec'y, Dep't of Corr.
  309 F. 3d 770· 11th Cir.· 2019-04-12 ·cited 148×
  The Eleventh Circuit held that a deficient state post-conviction motion, dismissed with leave to amend, relates back to the original filing date under Florida law, thus tolling the AEDPA statute of limitations for the entire period the motion was pending, including the time betwe
• Darrian Bryant v. Ford
  967 F.3d 1272· 11th Cir.· 2020-08-03 ·cited 126×
  The Eleventh Circuit held that the district court abused its discretion by sua sponte dismissing a habeas petition as untimely without providing proper safeguards or using the correct operative date for calculating the statute of limitations.
• Meders v. Warden, Georgia Diagnostic Prison
  911 F.3d 1335· 11th Cir.· 2019-01-04 ·cited 82×
  Jimmy Fletcher Meders, convicted of murder and armed robbery in Georgia state court, sought federal habeas relief claiming his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to use pretrial witness statements and police reports for impeachment and failing to object to certain evidence
• Turner v. Sec'y, Dep't of Corr.
  991 F.3d 1208· 11th Cir.· 2021-03-25 ·cited 11×
  The Eleventh Circuit affirmed the district court's dismissal of the habeas petition, holding that the district court did not err in sua sponte determining the petition was untimely based on the petitioner's own admissions and provided dates, and that the petitioner had an opportu
• Paez v. Sec'y, Fla. Dep't OF Corr.
  931 F.3d 1304· 11th Cir.· 2019-07-31 ·cited 10×
  A district court abuses its discretion by sua sponte dismissing a habeas petition as untimely without first ordering the State to respond, even if the court properly took judicial notice of state court dockets.
• Jennings v. Sec'y, Fla. Dep't of Corr.
  108 F.4th 1299· 11th Cir.· 2024-07-22 ·cited 9×
  A second-in-time federal habeas petition raising Brady and Giglio claims is considered a second or successive petition subject to statutory restrictions, and the district court correctly dismissed it for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction when the petitioner failed to obtain pri
• Bowles v. Sec'y, Fla. Dep't OF Corr., Attorney Gen., State of Fla.
  935 F.3d 1176· 11th Cir.· 2019-08-21 ·cited 9×
  The court held that the district court correctly dismissed the petitioner's second federal habeas petition for lack of jurisdiction because he failed to obtain authorization from the court of appeals before filing it, as required by AEDPA.
• Lozada v. Deeds
  964 F.2d 956· 9th Cir.· 1992-05-20 ·cited 8×
  Prejudice is presumed under Strickland when counsel fails to file a notice of appeal without the petitioner's consent.
• Mahorney v. Wallman
  917 F.2d 469· 10th Cir.· 1990-10-24 ·cited 6×
  The dissenting judge would affirm the district court's decision, arguing that the prosecutor's remarks, when viewed in the totality of the circumstances, did not deny the defendant due process.
• Valles v. Lynaugh
  835 F.2d 126· 5th Cir.· 1988-01-08 ·cited 6×
  The court affirmed the district court's rejection of the habeas petition, finding no merit in the appellant's contentions.
• Fink v. A.L. Lockhart
  823 F.2d 204· 8th Cir.· 1987-07-06 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the petitioner failed to demonstrate prejudice from his counsel's alleged errors, and therefore, his claim of ineffective assistance of counsel was properly denied.
• Griffin v. Sec'y, Dep't of Corr.
  2024 WL 964197· M.D. Fla.· 2024-10-21 ·cited 3×
  The court held that the petitioner's habeas corpus petition was time-barred under AEDPA because he failed to demonstrate entitlement to equitable tolling.
• Cuffy v. Dixon
  2021 WL 247917· S.D. Fla.· 2023-09-27 ·cited 2×
  A resentencing order that is nunc pro tunc to the original judgment does not create a 'new judgment' for purposes of filing a second or successive federal habeas corpus petition.
• Williams v. Groose
  979 F.2d 1335· 8th Cir.· 1992-11-23 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the appointment of counsel and in dismissing the habeas petition as an abuse of the writ.
• Wiles v. Jones
  960 F.2d 751· 8th Cir.· 1992-04-03 ·cited 2×
  The court affirmed the dismissal of the federal habeas petition, finding no merit to the petitioner's claims of ineffective assistance of counsel, constitutional violations, or jurisdictional defects.
• Rapheld v. Delo
  940 F.2d 324· 8th Cir.· 1991-07-31 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the petitioner failed to show actual innocence to excuse the abuse of the writ in filing a successive habeas petition.
• Parette v. A.L. Lockhart
  927 F.2d 366· 8th Cir.· 1991-02-28 ·cited 2×
  The court held that while a district court in the district of confinement has habeas jurisdiction over an attack on another state's detainer, the petition was properly dismissed without prejudice because the petitioner failed to exhaust available state remedies in Louisiana.
• White v. Wyrick
  651 F.2d 597· 8th Cir.· 1981-06-17 ·cited 2×
  A federal court properly denied a habeas corpus petition where the petitioner failed to exhaust available state remedies for most of his claims.
• Restricted Filer - Alfred v. Dixon
  2023 WL 3686787· S.D. Fla.· 2023-08-22 ·cited 1×
  The court held that it lacked subject-matter jurisdiction over a successive habeas corpus petition filed without authorization from the court of appeals and sanctioned the petitioner for abusive litigation.
• LoRusso v. Sec'y, Fla. Dep't of Child. & Families
  N.D. Fla.· 2026-02-02
  The court held that the petitioner's amended petition for writ of habeas corpus should be dismissed as duplicative of prior filings.
• Bullard v. Sec'y, Dep't of Corr.
  M.D. Fla.· 2026-01-12
  The Court held that the petitioner's claims for ineffective assistance of counsel and double jeopardy were successive and dismissed for lack of jurisdiction, and the due process claim based on destroyed evidence was untimely.
• Masterson v. Sec'y, Fla. Dep't of Corr.
  M.D. Fla.· 2025-12-02
  The court held that the state court's denial of the petitioner's ineffective assistance of counsel claims was not contrary to, nor an unreasonable application of, clearly established federal law, nor based on an unreasonable determination of the facts.
• Harrell v. Sec'y, Fla. Dep't of Corr.
  M.D. Fla.· 2025-11-17
  The court held that the petitioner's federal habeas corpus petition was timely filed because the one-year limitations period was tolled by his state post-conviction proceedings.
• Mendoza v. Sec'y, Dep't of Corr.
  M.D. Fla.· 2025-11-05
  The federal habeas petition was dismissed as untimely because it was filed outside the one-year statute of limitations, and the petitioner's state post-conviction motion did not toll the period as it was filed after the deadline expired.
• Cowan v. Sec'y, Fla. Dep't of Corr.
  M.D. Fla.· 2025-11-04
  The court held that the petition for a writ of habeas corpus was untimely filed, as it was filed more than six years after the one-year limitations period expired.
• Reeves v. Sec'y, Dep't of Corr.
  M.D. Fla.· 2025-10-31
  The federal habeas petition is dismissed as time-barred because it was filed outside the one-year limitations period prescribed by the AEDPA. A certificate of appealability is denied as reasonable jurists would not debate the procedural issue of untimeliness.
• Oree West, Jr. v. Sec'y, Dep't of Corr.
  M.D. Fla.· 2025-10-28
  The court held that the petitioner's habeas corpus petition was time-barred under the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (AEDPA).
• Johnson v. Sec'y, Dep't of Corr.
  M.D. Fla.· 2025-10-07
  The federal habeas corpus petition is dismissed as time-barred because the petitioner failed to file within the one-year limitations period prescribed by AEDPA. An amended judgment entered nunc pro tunc does not reset the limitations clock.
• Torie G. Richardson v. Dixon
  N.D. Fla.· 2025-10-02
  A § 2254 habeas petition filed more than one year after a conviction becomes final, without a properly filed state post-conviction motion pending during the limitations period, is untimely and must be dismissed under Habeas Rule 4.
• Thomas v. Sec'y of the Fla. Dep't of Corr.
  S.D. Fla.· 2025-09-30
  The court held that the pro se petition for a writ of habeas corpus was untimely under the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (AEDPA) because it was filed more than eight years after the one-year limitation period expired, and the petitioner failed to establish actual
• Dalrymple v. Sec'y, Dep't of Corr. (Sarasota)
  M.D. Fla.· 2025-09-16
  The court held that the petitioner's claims were waived by his guilty plea and, alternatively, that the claims lacked merit and were procedurally barred. A certificate of appealability was denied.
• Myers v. Sec'y, Fla. Dep't of Corr. (Hillsborough)
  M.D. Fla.· 2025-09-08
  The court denied the petition for writ of habeas corpus, finding that the state court's rejection of the petitioner's ineffective assistance of counsel claims was not contrary to or an unreasonable application of federal law.
• Holliday v. Dixon
  N.D. Fla.· 2025-09-08
  The court held that a federal habeas petition filed without prior authorization from the court of appeals is an unauthorized successive petition over which the district court lacks jurisdiction.
• Kierce v. Sec'y, Dep't of Corr. (Polk County)
  M.D. Fla.· 2025-09-05
  The court held that the state court's denial of the petitioner's ineffective assistance of counsel claims was not contrary to or an unreasonable application of federal law, and thus denied the petition for a writ of habeas corpus.
• Madera v. State
  S.D. Fla.· 2025-09-04
  The court held that the petitioner's federal habeas corpus petition was untimely filed under AEDPA, as it was filed more than one year after his state conviction became final and he failed to establish any exceptions to the limitations period.
• Oliver v. Sec'y, Dep't of Corr. (Duval County)
  M.D. Fla.· 2025-08-15
  The court held that the petitioner's habeas corpus petition was timely filed, denying the respondents' motion to dismiss.
• Jackson v. Dixon
  N.D. Fla.· 2025-08-05
  The court held that a successive federal habeas petition filed without prior authorization from the court of appeals must be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.
• Bates v. Sec'y, Dep't of Corr. (Manatee County)
  M.D. Fla.· 2025-07-22
  The court denied the petition for a writ of habeas corpus, finding that the state court's decisions were not contrary to or an unreasonable application of federal law.
• Cone v. Sec'y, Dep't of Corr. (Marion County)
  M.D. Fla.· 2025-07-21
  The court held that the petitioner's federal habeas corpus petition was untimely filed under AEDPA's one-year statute of limitations, and equitable tolling and actual innocence exceptions did not apply.
• Erickson v. Sec'y, Dep't of Corr. (Sarasota)
  M.D. Fla.· 2025-07-16
  The court held that the petitioner's federal habeas corpus petition was untimely and not subject to equitable tolling because she failed to demonstrate extraordinary circumstances and lacked diligence in pursuing her rights.
• Bebee v. Sec'y, Dep't of Corr. (Polk)
  M.D. Fla.· 2025-07-15
  The court held that the petitioner's federal habeas corpus petition was time-barred under AEDPA and that he failed to establish the actual innocence exception.
• Smith v. Sec'y, Fla. Dep't of Corr. (Duval County)
  M.D. Fla.· 2025-06-27
  The court held that the petitioner is entitled to equitable tolling, making his federal habeas petition timely filed.
• Burns v. Sec'y, Dep't of Corr. (Duval County)
  M.D. Fla.· 2025-06-17
  The court held that the petitioner's habeas corpus petition was untimely filed and denied his request for equitable tolling, as the circumstances did not constitute extraordinary reasons for delay.
• Jones v. Sec'y, Dep't of Corr. (Pinellas County)
  M.D. Fla.· 2025-06-03
  The court held that the petitioner's habeas corpus petition was untimely filed under AEDPA and therefore dismissed.
• Coffer v. Sec'y, Dep't of Corr. (Polk County)
  M.D. Fla.· 2025-05-28
  Deandre Coffer, a Florida prisoner convicted of first-degree murder, filed a federal habeas corpus petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 challenging his conviction. The court denied the petition, finding that Coffer failed to demonstrate that the state court's decisions were contrary t
• Jackson v. State
  N.D. Fla.· 2025-05-27
  The court recommended that the habeas petition be transferred to the Middle District of Florida.
• Jackson v. Sec'y, Dep't of Corr. (Duval)
  M.D. Fla.· 2025-05-27
  The court recommended that the habeas petition be transferred to the Middle District of Florida.
• Whiddon v. Sec'y of the Fla. Dep't of Corr.
  N.D. Fla.· 2025-05-06
  The amended petition's claims do not relate back to the timely filed original petition and are therefore untimely.
• Odom v. State
  S.D. Fla.· 2025-04-30
  The court held that a pro se petitioner's habeas corpus petition was time-barred under AEDPA's one-year statute of limitations because it was filed long after the limitations period expired and the petitioner failed to establish grounds for equitable tolling or the actual innocen