28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition For Writ Of Habeas Corpus

634 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 415 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · browse and sort

• Carroll v. Secretary, DOC, FL Attorney General
  574 F.3d 1354· 11th Cir.· 2009-07-17 ·cited 243×
  Elmer Leon Carroll, a Florida death row inmate, appealed the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas petition challenging his capital conviction and sentence. Carroll raised two Atkins v. Virginia claims: (1) that he was mentally retarded and thus exempt from execu
• Nance v. Warden, Georgia Diagnostic Prison
  922 F.3d 1298· 11th Cir.· 2019-04-30 ·cited 206×·via 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition
  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.
• Marshall v. Sec'y, Fla. Dep't OF Corr., Attorney Gen., State of Fla.
  828 F.3d 1277· 11th Cir.· 2016-07-12 ·cited 197×
  Johnny Marshall appealed the denial of his habeas corpus petition challenging his Florida armed robbery conviction, arguing that his trial counsel rendered ineffective assistance under Strickland v. Washington by failing to move to suppress an eyewitness identification obtained d
• 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.
• Pye v. Warden, Georgia Diagnostic Prison
  50 F.4th 1025· 11th Cir.· 2022-10-04 ·cited 111×·via 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Habeas Corpus
  Willie James Pye, convicted of murder, kidnapping, rape, and robbery, challenged his death sentence on federal habeas review, arguing that his trial counsel rendered ineffective assistance during sentencing by failing to investigate and present mitigating evidence of his difficul
• Paez v. Sec'y, Fla. Dep't of Corr.
  947 F.3d 649· 11th Cir.· 2020-01-07 ·cited 111×
  A district court may sua sponte dismiss a habeas petition as untimely based on judicially noticed state court docket entries, provided the petitioner receives fair notice and an opportunity to be heard.
• Williams v. Maggio
  679 F.2d 381· 5th Cir.· 1982-06-21 ·cited 93×·via Habeas Corpus Review Under 28 U.S.C. § 2254
• Osbourne v. Sec'y, Fla. Dep't of Corr.
  968 F.3d 1261· 11th Cir.· 2020-08-07 ·cited 88×
  The Eleventh Circuit held that an amended sentence entered nunc pro tunc under Florida law relates back to the original judgment date and does not constitute a new judgment for purposes of determining if a habeas petition is second or successive.
• Meders v. Warden, Georgia Diagnostic Prison
  911 F.3d 1335· 11th Cir.· 2019-01-04 ·cited 82×·via 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition
  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
• Corn v. Zant
  708 F.2d 549· 11th Cir.· 1983-06-15 ·cited 80×·via 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Habeas Corpus
  The court held that the trial judge's remark about automatic appeal did not rise to the level of constitutional error, and the jury instructions on intent and malice did not impermissibly shift the burden of proof. Therefore, the petitioner did not suffer a due process violation.
• Stephens v. Kemp
  846 F.2d 642· 11th Cir.· 1988-04-22 ·cited 77×
  The court held that a jury instruction creating a presumption of intent is unconstitutional but the error was harmless because the defendant raised self-defense, thereby conceding the intent to kill, and alternatively, the evidence of intent was overwhelming. The court also held
• Freund v. Butterworth
  165 F.3d 839· 11th Cir.· 1999-01-22 ·cited 69×
  John Freund was convicted of first-degree murder for stabbing Ralph Walker to death in 1984 and sentenced to life imprisonment. Freund challenged his conviction on habeas corpus, alleging that his trial counsel at the law firm Foley, Colton and Duncan labored under conflicts of i
• Conover v. Honorable Frank M. Montemuro, Jr.
  477 F.2d 1073· 3d Cir.· 1972-12-20 ·cited 69×·via 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Habeas Corpus
  The court reinstated prior panel opinions, excluding portions on judicial immunity in § 1983 injunctive relief suits, and declined to rule on the issue.
• Johnson v. Singletary
  938 F.2d 1166· 11th Cir.· 1991-07-25 ·cited 68×
  Marvin Edwin Johnson, a Florida death row inmate, appealed the district court's denial of his second federal habeas corpus petition challenging his death sentence for a 1978 pharmacy robbery and murder. The panel majority had concluded Johnson was entitled to an evidentiary heari
• Tolbert Dickson v. Louie L. Wainwright
  683 F.2d 348· 11th Cir.· 1982-08-16 ·cited 67×·via 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Habeas Corpus
  The court held that while sufficiency of evidence and evidentiary/prosecutorial misconduct claims were properly denied, the claim of ineffective assistance of counsel regarding pretrial preparation warranted further inquiry.
• Mansfield v. Sec'y, Dep't OF Corr., Attorney Gen. of the State of Fla.
  679 F.3d 1301· 11th Cir.· 2012-05-09 ·cited 65×
  Scott Mansfield was convicted of first-degree murder and sentenced to death for the brutal killing of Sara Robles. The Florida Supreme Court on direct appeal found that the admission of a videotaped custodial interrogation without Miranda warnings was constitutional error but con
• Davidson J. James v. Singletary
  957 F.2d 1562· 11th Cir.· 1992-03-30 ·cited 60×
  Davidson James, a Florida death row inmate convicted of first-degree murder, attempted murder, and armed robbery, petitioned for federal habeas corpus relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The Eleventh Circuit held that James's Brady claim regarding withheld evidence failed because he d
• Smith v. Comm'r, Ala. Dep't of Corr.
  67 F.4th 1335· 11th Cir.· 2023-05-19 ·cited 57×·via Habeas Corpus Relief Under 28 U.S.C. § 2254
  Joseph Clifton Smith, convicted of capital murder, challenged his death sentence on the grounds that he is intellectually disabled, which would render the sentence unconstitutional under the Eighth Amendment under the principle established in Atkins v. Virginia. The Eleventh Circ
• McCULLOUGH v. Singletary
  967 F.2d 530· 11th Cir.· 1992-08-03 ·cited 57×
  Alonzo McCullough, convicted of first-degree burglary and sexual assault as an adult at age seventeen, challenged his life sentence without parole on habeas corpus, arguing that enhancement of his sentence based on four prior juvenile convictions violated due process, shocked the
• Coleman v. Singletary
  30 F.3d 1420· 11th Cir.· 1994-09-08 ·cited 51×
  Gerald Anthony Coleman, convicted of murdering his ten-year-old sister when he was fifteen years old, appealed his federal habeas corpus denial, challenging the admissibility of his confession on two grounds: that police violated his Fifth Amendment right to remain silent by cont
• Alphonso Cave v. Singletary
  971 F.2d 1513· 11th Cir.· 1992-08-26 ·cited 51×
  Alphonso Cave, convicted of murder and sentenced to death, challenged his conviction and sentence through a federal habeas corpus petition raising thirteen claims. The district court held an evidentiary hearing on Cave's claim of ineffective assistance of trial counsel and found
• Branch v. Estelle
  631 F.2d 1229· 5th Cir.· 1980-12-04 ·cited 51×·via Habeas Corpus Relief Under 28 U.S.C. § 2254
  The court held that the petitioner was not entitled to federal habeas corpus relief on any of his claims, affirming the denial of his petition.
• Thanquarius Calhoun v. Warden, Baldwin State Prison
  92 F.4th 1338· 11th Cir.· 2024-02-15 ·cited 48×·via 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Habeas Corpus
  Thanquarius Calhoun was convicted of felony murder and other crimes after leading police on a high-speed chase that resulted in the death of his passenger, Marion Shore, when officers used a PIT maneuver to stop his vehicle. On federal habeas review, the Eleventh Circuit held tha
• Jones v. Sec'y, Fla. Dep't OF Corr., Attorney Gen., State of Fla.
  906 F.3d 1339· 11th Cir.· 2018-10-29 ·cited 48×
  Philip Walter Jones was convicted of aggravated domestic battery in 2006 and sentenced to 20 years imprisonment. Six years after his conviction became final, he filed a Rule 3.850 motion alleging newly discovered evidence that his trial counsel failed to inform him of a ten-year
• Kirkland v. Fla. Dep't of Corr.
  2006 WL 3755195· N.D. Fla.· 2024-08-20 ·cited 44×
  The court held that the petitioner's federal habeas corpus petition is time-barred under AEDPA's one-year limitations period.
• Redner v. Dean
  29 F.3d 1495· 11th Cir.· 1994-08-26 ·cited 41×
  Joseph Redner challenged the constitutionality of a Citrus County, Florida ordinance regulating adult entertainment establishments after being convicted of operating such a facility without a license. The district court granted Redner's habeas corpus petition, finding the ordinan
• United States ex rel. James C. Haynes v. McKENDRICK
  481 F.2d 152· 2d Cir.· 1973-06-14 ·cited 39×·via 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Habeas Corpus
• In re Medina
  109 F.3d 1556· 11th Cir.· 1997-03-24 ·cited 38×
  Pedro Medina, sentenced to death for auto theft and first-degree murder, filed a second federal habeas corpus petition after his first petition was denied and his conviction affirmed. The Eleventh Circuit held that the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (AEDPA) amendme
• Verg Lee Nero v. Blackburn
  597 F.2d 991· 5th Cir.· 1979-06-29 ·cited 37×·via 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Habeas Corpus
  The court held that the attorney's failure to move for a mistrial after the prosecutor improperly revealed inadmissible prior convictions constituted ineffective assistance of counsel.
• Henyard v. McDONOUGH
  459 F.3d 1217· 11th Cir.· 2006-08-11 ·cited 36×
  Richard Henyard was convicted in 1994 of carjacking Dorothy Lewis and her two children, murdering the children (Jasmine, age 3, and Jamilya, age 7), and raping and attempting to murder Dorothy Lewis. He was sentenced to death. On federal habeas review under 28 U.S.C. § 2254, Heny
• Raper v. Mintzes
  706 F.2d 161· 6th Cir.· 1983-04-27 ·cited 36×·via Habeas Corpus Relief Under 28 U.S.C. § 2254
  The prosecutor's comments on the uncontradicted nature of the evidence did not violate the petitioner's right against self-incrimination because the evidence could have been contradicted by sources other than the petitioner, and the comments were a permissible rebuttal to defense
• United States ex rel. Clinton Burnett v. People OF the State OF Ill.
  619 F.2d 668· 7th Cir.· 1980-04-22 ·cited 36×·via Habeas Corpus Relief Under 28 U.S.C. § 2254
  The court held that the petitioner's claims of due process violations based on an eleven-member jury, knowing use of perjured testimony, and prosecutorial misconduct were without merit.
• Sevier v. Turner
  742 F.2d 262· 6th Cir.· 1984-08-08 ·cited 34×·via 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Habeas Corpus
  The court held that federal abstention is not appropriate in this case, as the appellant alleged extraordinary circumstances involving federal constitutional violations.
• Reed v. Sec'y, Fla. Dep't OF Corr., Attorney Gen., State Of Fla.
  767 F.3d 1252· 11th Cir.· 2014-09-24 ·cited 33×
  Kelvin Leon Reed was convicted of vehicular homicide for striking two pedestrians while driving under the influence and sentenced to 35 years' imprisonment. Reed claimed his trial counsel rendered ineffective assistance under Strickland v. Washington by failing to investigate and
• Glock v. Moore
  195 F.3d 625· 11th Cir.· 1999-11-10 ·cited 33×
  Robert Glock was convicted of first-degree murder, kidnapping, and robbery and sentenced to death. On habeas review, Glock claimed his trial counsel provided ineffective assistance during the penalty phase by failing to discover and present evidence of childhood abuse, mental dis
• Martinelli v. Dugger
  817 F.2d 1499· 11th Cir.· 1987-06-01 ·cited 33×·via 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Habeas Corpus
  Prison grooming and dietary regulations are rationally related to substantial government interests and are not unconstitutional infringements on inmate religious freedom when balanced against penological objectives. The medical exemption for beards is not a less restrictive alter
• Hahn v. Burke
  430 F.2d 100· 7th Cir.· 1970-08-19 ·cited 33×·via 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Habeas Corpus
  The court held that the revocation of probation without a hearing violates the basic requirements of due process, and therefore, the revocation was a nullity.
• Braxton v. Estelle
  641 F.2d 392· 5th Cir.· 1981-04-03 ·cited 32×·via Habeas Corpus Review Under 28 U.S.C. § 2254
  The court held that the petitioner's numerous complaints were without merit and affirmed the District Court's denial of his § 2254 petition.
• Weddell v. Meierhenry
  636 F.2d 211· 8th Cir.· 1980-12-11 ·cited 32×·via 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Habeas Corpus
  The court held that the crimes were not committed in 'Indian Country,' prosecutorial remarks were not grounds for relief, and an illegal arrest does not void a conviction.
• Russell v. Rolfs
  893 F.2d 1033· 9th Cir.· 1990-01-09 ·cited 31×
  The court held that the state is estopped from arguing procedural default because it previously represented to the federal court that an adequate and available state remedy existed, which contradicted its later argument that the petitioner was procedurally barred in state court.
• United States ex rel. John Williams v. DeROBERTIS
  715 F.2d 1174· 7th Cir.· 1983-08-19 ·cited 29×·via 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Habeas Corpus
  A criminal defendant's ignorance of specific jury attributes, such as the right to participate in jury selection or the requirement of a substantial majority vote for conviction, does not render their waiver of a jury trial constitutionally invalid.
• Grady Lee Smith v. W.J. Estelle, Jr.
  711 F.2d 677· 5th Cir.· 1983-08-11 ·cited 28×·via Habeas Corpus Relief Under 28 U.S.C. § 2254
  The court held that the district court properly denied habeas corpus relief without an evidentiary hearing, as the record sufficiently demonstrated the voluntariness of the guilty plea and the adequacy of counsel.
• Brown v. A.L. Lockhart
  781 F.2d 654· 8th Cir.· 1986-01-14 ·cited 26×·via 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Habeas Corpus
  The court held that the petitioner's allegation of systematic exclusion of Black persons from jury service was sufficient to warrant an evidentiary hearing, but his claim of ineffective assistance of counsel failed due to lack of prejudice.
• van Poyck v. Louie L. Wainwright
  595 F.2d 1083· 5th Cir.· 1979-05-24 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the petitioner's claim of factual incompetency to plead guilty was exhausted and raised a substantial issue requiring an evidentiary hearing, but his claim regarding the factual basis for the plea was unexhausted.
• Bush v. Muncy
  659 F.2d 402· 4th Cir.· 1981-09-04 ·cited 25×·via 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Habeas Corpus
  Violations of the Interstate Agreement on Detainers (IAD) trial-before-return provisions are not cognizable under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas corpus, but can be grounds for relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Prosecutorial immunity bars claims against Maryland officials, but claims agains
• Marks v. Estelle
  691 F.2d 730· 5th Cir.· 1982-11-15 ·cited 24×·via 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Habeas Corpus
  The court held that a petitioner's delay in filing a habeas petition is excused until the right asserted in the petition legally exists, and the state must demonstrate prejudice occurring after that point. The court also held that ineffective assistance of counsel does not consti
• Hart v. Attorney Gen. OF THE State OF Fla.
  323 F.3d 884· 11th Cir.· 2003-03-05 ·cited 23×·via Habeas Corpus Review Under 28 U.S.C. § 2254
  Robert Hart was convicted of two murders and armed robbery based primarily on a taped confession obtained after he signed a Miranda waiver form. The Eleventh Circuit granted habeas relief, holding that Hart's waiver was involuntary and not made with full awareness of his rights b
• Holt v. Wyrick
  649 F.2d 543· 8th Cir.· 1981-05-14 ·cited 23×·via 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Habeas Corpus
  The court held that the admission of preliminary hearing testimony and the use of information from tape recordings, even if obtained unconstitutionally, were harmless errors beyond a reasonable doubt, and that the retrial after a mistrial due to jury deadlock did not violate doub
• Anderson v. Singletary
  111 F.3d 801· 11th Cir.· 1997-04-18 ·cited 22×
  The Eleventh Circuit held that the filing fee requirements of the Prison Litigation Reform Act of 1995 do not apply to habeas corpus proceedings under 28 U.S.C. §§ 2254 and 2255. Although habeas corpus proceedings are technically civil in nature, they are hybrid actions sui gener