28 U.S.C. § 2254(D) Presumption Of Correctness

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

• Lightbourne v. Dugger
  829 F.2d 1012· 11th Cir.· 1987-09-18 ·cited 128×
  The court held that the informant's actions were attributable to the state and that the informant deliberately elicited incriminating statements, violating the defendant's Sixth Amendment right to counsel.
• O'Bryan v. W.J. Estelle, Jr.
  714 F.2d 365· 5th Cir.· 1983-08-26 ·cited 75×
  The Fifth Circuit should apply the same standard of review in Witherspoon cases as in other habeas corpus matters, giving deference to state court factual findings unless clearly erroneous, and remanding for evidentiary hearings when the record is unclear.
• Mason v. Balcom
  531 F.2d 717· 5th Cir.· 1976-05-13 ·cited 71×
  The court affirmed the district court's judgment, finding that the petitioner's representation was perfunctory and thus ineffective.
• Bertolotti v. Dugger
  883 F.2d 1503· 11th Cir.· 1989-08-31 ·cited 69×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying an evidentiary hearing on the ineffective assistance of counsel claim, and that counsel's performance was not deficient under the Sixth Amendment.
• Marino v. Vasquez
  812 F.2d 499· 9th Cir.· 1987-03-09 ·cited 48×
  The court held that jury misconduct involving an unauthorized dictionary definition of malice and an out-of-court experiment created a reasonable possibility of prejudice, warranting habeas relief for murder and attempted murder convictions, but not for felony false imprisonment.
• Wicker v. O.L. McCOTTER
  783 F.2d 487· 5th Cir.· 1986-02-18 ·cited 46×
  The court affirmed the denial of habeas corpus relief, finding no constitutional violations in the conviction or sentencing, including issues of hypnotically-enhanced testimony, juror exclusion, ineffective assistance of counsel, and Fourth Amendment claims.
• Stano Perri v. Dir., Dep't OF Corr., State OF Ill.
  817 F.2d 448· 7th Cir.· 1987-04-29 ·cited 44×
  The court held that a state court's determination of whether a defendant knowingly and intelligently waived Miranda rights is a factual finding entitled to the presumption of correctness under 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d).
• United States ex rel. Johnnie L. Savory v. Lane
  832 F.2d 1011· 7th Cir.· 1987-10-30 ·cited 43×
  The court held that even though constitutional errors occurred during the trial, they were harmless beyond a reasonable doubt because the evidence of guilt was overwhelming.
• Winfield C. Patterson v. Cuyler
  729 F.2d 925· 3d Cir.· 1984-03-13 ·cited 42×
  The court held that the state court's findings regarding custody and the voluntariness of the waiver of Miranda rights were entitled to a presumption of correctness under 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d) and were supported by the record.
• Selz v. The State OF Cal.
  423 F.2d 702· 9th Cir.· 1970-02-19 ·cited 38×
  A federal district court cannot rely on state court findings under 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d) without reviewing the state court record, especially when allegations of an unfair hearing or newly discovered evidence exist.
• Oliver v. Louie L. Wainwright
  782 F.2d 1521· 11th Cir.· 1986-02-24 ·cited 37×
  The court held that the joint representation of co-defendants did not create an actual conflict of interest that adversely affected counsel's performance, as the alternative defense theory was not plausible based on the evidence.
• Hawkman v. Parratt
  661 F.2d 1161· 8th Cir.· 1981-10-14 ·cited 36×
  The court held that a defendant's attorney's failure to adequately investigate facts, inform the defendant of charges and consequences, and initiate plea negotiations constitutes ineffective assistance of counsel, warranting habeas corpus relief.
• Maes v. Patterson
  401 F.2d 200· 10th Cir.· 1968-10-02 ·cited 36×
  A federal court cannot summarily dismiss a state prisoner's habeas corpus petition without independently reviewing the state court's record and determining if due process was observed.
• Bundy v. Louie L. Wainwright
  808 F.2d 1410· 11th Cir.· 1987-01-15 ·cited 35×
  The district court erred in denying the habeas corpus petition and stay of execution, and its judgment must be reversed and remanded for proper consideration of the constitutional issues.
• Lincoln v. Franklin Y.K. Sunn
  807 F.2d 805· 9th Cir.· 1987-01-06 ·cited 35×
  The court held that the district court erred in denying habeas corpus relief without an evidentiary hearing and lacked sufficient findings to affirm the denial. The court reversed and remanded for further proceedings on prosecutorial misconduct and notice issues.
• Ross v. Kemp
  756 F.2d 1483· 11th Cir.· 1985-03-25 ·cited 35×
• United States ex rel. Sidney Foster v. DeROBERTIS
  741 F.2d 1007· 7th Cir.· 1984-08-16 ·cited 35×
  The court held that the district court correctly denied the habeas corpus petition, finding no constitutional error in the state court proceedings regarding competency, sufficiency of evidence, or evidentiary rulings.
• Agan v. Dugger
  835 F.2d 1337· 11th Cir.· 1987-12-30 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the inmate's claims of incompetence and ineffective assistance of counsel warranted an evidentiary hearing, which had not been provided by the state court.
• Buxton v. Lynaugh
  879 F.2d 140· 5th Cir.· 1989-07-21 ·cited 30×
  The state court's determination of a factual issue based solely on conflicting affidavits, without an evidentiary hearing, was not adequate to afford a full and fair hearing as required by 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d)(2).
• Bryan v. Warden, Ind. State Reformatory
  820 F.2d 217· 7th Cir.· 1987-05-15 ·cited 30×
  The court held that the voluntariness of a Miranda waiver is a factual determination entitled to deference under 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d), and that the appellant waived his due process claim by failing to raise it on rehearing.
• In re Parker
  423 F.2d 1021· 8th Cir.· 1970-03-23 ·cited 30×
  The federal court erred in granting habeas corpus relief because it failed to give presumptive weight to the state court's factual findings, and the petitioner did not provide convincing evidence to overcome this presumption.
• Chaney v. Lewis
  801 F.2d 1191· 9th Cir.· 1986-10-09 ·cited 27×
  The court held that a district court must independently review the state court record for mixed questions of fact and law in habeas corpus petitions, but not for purely factual or purely legal questions. Counsel should be appointed in death penalty habeas cases on remand due to c
• Austad v. Risley
  761 F.2d 1348· 9th Cir.· 1985-05-23 ·cited 27×
  A federal habeas court is not required to sua sponte obtain state court record exhibits if the petitioner has not produced them or demonstrated an inability to do so.
• Bowen v. Maynard
  799 F.2d 593· 10th Cir.· 1986-06-25 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the State violated due process by failing to disclose exculpatory evidence material to the defense, requiring the convictions to be set aside.
• United States ex rel. Lawrence Smith v. Fairman
  769 F.2d 386· 7th Cir.· 1985-07-22 ·cited 24×
  The State's failure to disclose a police firearms worksheet indicating the gun was inoperable violated Brady v. Maryland, entitling the petitioner to habeas corpus relief.
• Smith v. Zant
  887 F.2d 1407· 11th Cir.· 1989-09-29 ·cited 23×
• Felde v. Blackburn
  795 F.2d 400· 5th Cir.· 1986-07-21 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the record was insufficient to determine if the state court's finding of competency was supported, requiring a remand for further proceedings. Other claims were rejected.
• Young v. Herring
  777 F.2d 198· 5th Cir.· 1985-11-26 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the defendant's procedural default in failing to raise a timely objection to the identification testimony under Mississippi law barred federal habeas review, and that the evidence was otherwise sufficient to support the conviction.
• Holland v. Attorney General of New Jersey
  777 F.2d 150· 3d Cir.· 1985-11-22 ·cited 18×
  The admission of a co-defendant's confession implicating the defendant, even if deemed harmless error by state courts, violates the Sixth Amendment's Confrontation Clause and requires reversal unless the prosecution proves harmlessness beyond a reasonable doubt.
• Williams v. Lou V. Brewer
  509 F.2d 227· 8th Cir.· 1974-12-31 ·cited 18×
  The dissenting judge holds that the defendant voluntarily and intelligently waived his right to counsel and right to remain silent, and his statements were not involuntary.
• United States v. Elrod
  782 F.2d 665· 7th Cir.· 1986-01-24 ·cited 16×
  A petitioner seeking federal habeas corpus relief cannot raise a claim that was procedurally defaulted in state court unless they demonstrate cause and prejudice, and the claim's basis must appear in the trial record to establish cause.
• Dickerson v. Fogg
  692 F.2d 238· 2d Cir.· 1982-10-25 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the circumstances of the identification were sufficiently suggestive to warrant careful consideration of reliability under established legal criteria.
• Collazo v. Estelle
  940 F.2d 411· 9th Cir.· 1991-07-18 ·cited 15×
  The court held that the state court's denial of the writ should be affirmed, finding that the defendant initiated contact with officers and was not coerced into waiving his right to counsel.
• Lesko v. Lehman
  925 F.2d 1527· 3d Cir.· 1991-02-11 ·cited 15×
  The court held that the district court erred in failing to hold an evidentiary hearing on Lesko's claim that his guilty plea was used in violation of due process, and that prosecutorial comments tainted the jury's sentencing determination.
• Simmons v. A.L. Lockhart
  814 F.2d 504· 8th Cir.· 1987-03-18 ·cited 14×
  The court affirmed the district court's denial of habeas corpus relief, finding no error in the trial court's rulings on change of venue, juror impartiality, or discovery violations.
• Tavares v. Holbrook
  779 F.2d 1· 1st Cir.· 1985-12-11 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the trial court's thorough investigation and finding of no jury bias, supported by juror statements, meant the defendant was not deprived of his constitutional right to a fair trial by an impartial jury.
• Bruce v. Duckworth
  659 F.2d 776· 7th Cir.· 1981-09-14 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying habeas corpus relief, affirming the denial of the petitioner's claims regarding identification testimony, juror prejudice, reciprocal discovery, and double jeopardy.
• Ruiz v. Cady
  635 F.2d 584· 7th Cir.· 1980-11-07 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the district court erred in denying habeas relief without independently examining the entire state court record to determine the materiality of the undisclosed witness agreement.
• Endress v. Dugger
  880 F.2d 1244· 11th Cir.· 1989-08-21 ·cited 12×
  The district court properly applied the presumption of correctness to state appellate court findings and correctly concluded that the petitioner's statements were voluntary and not the product of illegal interrogation.
• Hunt v. State OF Okla.
  683 F.2d 1305· 10th Cir.· 1982-07-22 ·cited 12×
  The court held that while the state trial court's jury instructions on scienter were insufficient, the error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt because the evidence overwhelmingly demonstrated the defendant's knowledge of the film's contents, and her defense was not based on
• Wright v. State OF Minn. & Robert A. Erickson
  833 F.2d 746· 8th Cir.· 1987-11-18 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the appellant was not entitled to habeas relief because the state court's findings of competency and effective assistance of counsel were supported by the record, and an evidentiary hearing was not required.
• Williams v. Lynaugh
  809 F.2d 1063· 5th Cir.· 1987-01-28 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the jury was properly selected, the ineffective assistance of counsel claim was insufficient, and the use of psychiatric evidence did not violate the defendant's rights.
• Adams v. A.R. Jago
  703 F.2d 978· 6th Cir.· 1983-04-07 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the defendant's Sixth Amendment right to effective assistance of counsel was not violated by his trial attorney's actions or inactions.
• Loveday v. Davis
  697 F.2d 135· 6th Cir.· 1983-01-05 ·cited 10×
  A federal court is not required to examine the trial transcript when a habeas petition alleges insufficiency of evidence if the petitioner does not challenge the state court's factual determinations or invoke exceptions to the presumption of correctness.
• United States ex rel. Theodore Ross v. Franzen
  668 F.2d 933· 7th Cir.· 1982-01-13 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the majority opinion erred in vacating the state trial court judgment based on habeas corpus power.
• Lewis v. Huch
  964 F.2d 670· 7th Cir.· 1992-05-20 ·cited 8×
  The court affirmed the denial of the habeas petition, holding that the petitioner knowingly and intelligently waived her right to conflict-free counsel and that the trial court's actions did not violate her due process rights.
• Jones v. Jones
  938 F.2d 838· 8th Cir.· 1991-07-09 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying the petition for a writ of habeas corpus, affirming the denial of relief on claims of jury discrimination, prosecutorial misconduct, inconsistent verdicts, and ineffective assistance of counsel.
• Tamayo-Reyes v. J.C. Keeney
  926 F.2d 1492· 9th Cir.· 1991-03-04 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court erred in denying an evidentiary hearing on the claim that the defendant's nolo contendere plea was unconstitutional due to inadequate translation of the mens rea element of manslaughter, as the material facts were not adequately developed in
• Beachum v. Tansy
  903 F.2d 1321· 10th Cir.· 1990-05-22 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the admission of hypnotically influenced testimony, even if potentially unreliable, did not violate the defendant's constitutional rights given the safeguards employed and the victim's consistent testimony. Claims of prosecutorial misconduct, ineffective assis
• Estock v. Lane
  842 F.2d 184· 7th Cir.· 1988-03-16 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court properly granted the writ of habeas corpus because the state court's finding of no bona fide doubt as to the petitioner's competence was not supported by the record.