28 U.S.C. § 2254(D) Presumption Of Correctness For State Court Findings

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

• United States ex rel. Theodore Ross v. Franzen
  688 F.2d 1181· 7th Cir.· 1982-09-24 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the trial court's failure to submit a straight 'not guilty' verdict form to the jury violated the defendant's Sixth and Fourteenth Amendment rights to have a jury determine guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
• Ford v. Parratt
  673 F.2d 232· 8th Cir.· 1982-03-15 ·cited 6×
  The dissenting judge would affirm the district court's denial of habeas corpus relief, finding no demonstrated prejudice from counsel's alleged failure to investigate a rumor.
• United States ex rel. Carl Buford v. Henderson
  524 F.2d 147· 2d Cir.· 1975-09-25 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying the habeas corpus petition without providing transcripts, as the petitioner had prior access and failed to demonstrate a need or new supporting evidence.
• Hutchinson v. Craven
  415 F.2d 278· 9th Cir.· 1969-08-14 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the district court erred in denying the habeas application based on prior proceedings because those proceedings lacked an evidentiary hearing on the merits. The court also noted a substantial new issue regarding denial of counsel that could warrant relief.
• Gore v. Dugger
  763 F. Supp. 1110· M.D. Fla.· 1989-08-17 ·cited 5×
  The court held that the trial court erred by precluding mitigating evidence regarding Petitioner's drug and alcohol abuse and cousin's dominance, violating the Eighth Amendment, and granted a new sentencing hearing on that claim.
• Wise v. Smith
  735 F.2d 735· 2d Cir.· 1984-05-25 ·cited 5×
  The court held that the appellant was not denied effective assistance of counsel nor a fair trial, and that the district court correctly denied his petition for a writ of habeas corpus.
• Meadows v. Kuhlmann
  812 F.2d 72· 2d Cir.· 1987-02-20 ·cited 4×
  Any error in admitting the lineup identification and the defendant's incriminating statements for impeachment was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt due to overwhelming evidence of guilt.
• Myrick v. Herb Maschner & the Attorney Gen. of the State of Kan.
  799 F.2d 642· 10th Cir.· 1986-08-29 ·cited 4×
  The court held that a constitutionally deficient jury instruction regarding intent was harmless error because the evidence overwhelmingly established the petitioner's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, and the instruction did not affect the verdict. The court also held that the pet
• Sandoval v. Rodriguez
  461 F.2d 1097· 10th Cir.· 1972-06-22 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the federal district court erred in dismissing the claim regarding the jury instruction on failure to testify for failure to exhaust state remedies, but that the instruction and any alleged prosecutorial comment were not constitutional violations or were harml
• White v. Gnann
  422 F.2d 1306· 5th Cir.· 1970-02-19 ·cited 4×
  The court held that a guilty plea entered voluntarily and understandingly waives all prior non-jurisdictional defects, and affirmed the denial of habeas corpus relief.
• United States ex rel. Herbert James Daley v. Yeager
  415 F.2d 779· 3d Cir.· 1969-08-11 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the relator's constitutional rights under the Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Amendments were violated when police obtained consent to search his apartment after he had requested counsel at a preliminary hearing.
• Galindo v. Ylst
  971 F.2d 1427· 9th Cir.· 1992-08-05 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the exclusion of the victim's statement did not deprive the defendant of constitutional rights, and the defendant waived his claim regarding impeachment with a prior conviction by not testifying.
• Gilley v. Collins
  968 F.2d 465· 5th Cir.· 1992-08-04 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the evidence was insufficient to support Richard Gilley's conviction for marijuana possession because the state failed to establish an affirmative link between him and the contraband.
• Amirault v. Fair
  968 F.2d 1404· 1st Cir.· 1992-07-08 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the petitioner's Sixth Amendment right to an impartial jury and right to a fair trial were not violated by a juror's nondisclosure of a past trauma or by prosecutorial remarks.
• Squires v. Dugger
  794 F. Supp. 1568· M.D. Fla.· 1992-05-26 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the petitioner's claims of ineffective assistance of counsel and Brady violations lacked merit, and that procedural default barred one claim.
• Jones v. Murray
  947 F.2d 1106· 4th Cir.· 1991-10-01 ·cited 2×
  The court affirmed the denial of the habeas corpus petition, finding no constitutional error in the denial of the petition or the underlying state court judgment.
• Dante Todaro # AJ-1779 v. Fulcomer
  944 F.2d 1079· 3d Cir.· 1991-09-10 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the state trial court's fact-finding procedure afforded the defendant a full and fair hearing, and the district court did not err in denying an evidentiary hearing on the habeas corpus petition.
• Cannon v. A.L. Lockhart
  850 F.2d 437· 8th Cir.· 1988-06-28 ·cited 2×
  The court held that a new trial requires demonstrating that a juror failed to honestly answer a material question on voir dire and that a correct answer would have provided a basis for a challenge for cause.
• Oviedo v. Jago
  809 F.2d 326· 6th Cir.· 1987-01-21 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the juvenile court's reliance on facts and information not formally introduced into evidence at a transfer hearing did not violate the petitioner's federal due process rights, as the state court had found all relevant criteria were considered.
• Bailleaux v. Hoyt C. Cupp
  535 F.2d 543· 9th Cir.· 1976-05-19 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying the habeas corpus petition, as the appellant was not a parolee and the state board's conditions were lawful.
• Dodge v. Johnson
  471 F.2d 1249· 6th Cir.· 1973-01-19 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the appellant failed to carry his burden of proving his statements were involuntary or that he was denied his constitutional right to counsel at the preliminary examination.
• Woods v. Dugger
  711 F. Supp. 586· M.D. Fla.· 1989-04-14 ·cited 1×
  The court denied the petition for a writ of habeas corpus, finding no constitutional violations regarding jury intimidation, discriminatory peremptory challenges, denial of continuances, execution of an eighteen-year-old, transcript errors, or the Hitchcock claim.
• Gladden v. Pogue
  384 F.2d 920· 9th Cir.· 1967-11-03 ·cited 1×
  The court affirmed the grant of habeas corpus, finding the district court's determination that the appellee did not consent to the search was not clearly erroneous.
• McKEE v. Crispus C. NIX
  995 F.2d 833· 8th Cir.· 1993-06-14
  The court held that the district court properly denied the habeas corpus petition because the petitioner procedurally defaulted on most claims and the remaining claims lacked merit or were based on state law errors.
• Prewitt v. Goeke
  978 F.2d 1073· 8th Cir.· 1992-11-04
  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.
• Garrett v. Collins
  951 F.2d 57· 5th Cir.· 1992-01-06
  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.
• Derric Morrison v. State OF Mo.
  946 F.2d 1340· 8th Cir.· 1991-10-09
  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.
• Bainter v. Trickey
  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
• Flugence v. Butler
  848 F.2d 77· 5th Cir.· 1988-06-29
  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
• Atwell v. Blackburn
  800 F.2d 502· 5th Cir.· 1986-09-26
  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.
• Rogers v. Israel
  746 F.2d 1280-1288· 7th Cir.· 1984-10-16
  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
• United States ex rel. Lavada Woollums v. Greer
  728 F.2d 918· 7th Cir.· 1984-02-24
  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.
• Tyler v. Wyrick
  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.
• Griswold v. Eyman
  452 F.2d 923· 9th Cir.· 1971-11-30
  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.
• United States ex rel. Ronald Futia v. Reincke
  397 F.2d 778· 2d Cir.· 1968-06-05
  The appellate court affirmed the district court's dismissal of the habeas corpus petition.