28 U.S.C. § 2254(D)

712 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 59 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• Craker v. Procunier
  756 F.2d 1212· 5th Cir.· 1985-04-11 ·cited 12×
  The court held that a knowing and voluntary guilty plea generally precludes a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel, but remanded because the record lacked a clear finding on the plea's voluntariness.
• United States ex rel. Jose Mireles v. Greer
  736 F.2d 1160· 7th Cir.· 1984-06-12 ·cited 12×
  The court held that a trial judge's initial doubt about a defendant's competency to stand trial can be dissipated by subsequent evidence and reports, and the judge is not automatically required to hold a hearing if that doubt is reasonably resolved.
• Daigre v. Maggio
  705 F.2d 786· 5th Cir.· 1983-05-27 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the district court erred in denying an evidentiary hearing on the petitioner's claims of ineffective assistance of counsel and right to counsel at lineup, but affirmed the denial of the claim regarding an impermissibly suggestive lineup.
• Yount v. Patton
  710 F.2d 956· 3d Cir.· 1983-05-10 ·cited 12×
  The court, in a concurring opinion, argues that the established constitutional standard for jury impartiality, allowing jurors with preconceived notions of guilt if they promise to be impartial, is flawed and should be replaced with a stricter standard.
• United States v. Bengston
  702 F.2d 656· 7th Cir.· 1983-03-18 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the indictment was constitutionally sufficient but remanded for an evidentiary hearing on whether the attorney's motion to withdraw due to a conflict of interest was dilatory.
• Aiken v. Spalding
  684 F.2d 632· 9th Cir.· 1982-08-17 ·cited 12×
  Difficulty in reprosecution due to delay in filing a habeas petition is not sufficient prejudice to warrant dismissal under Rule 9(a).
• 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
• United States ex rel. James W. Green v. Greer
  667 F.2d 585· 7th Cir.· 1981-12-10 ·cited 12×
  A federal district court is not required to examine the full trial record in a habeas corpus petition alleging insufficiency of evidence if the petitioner fails to identify any inaccuracies or incompleteness in the factual summaries already before the court.
• Cornell Fuller v. Anderson
  662 F.2d 420· 6th Cir.· 1981-09-18 ·cited 12×
  The dissenting judge would reverse the district court's grant of habeas corpus, arguing that federal courts are bound by state court factual findings and that the jury's verdict was rational.
• Bivens v. Wyrick
  640 F.2d 179· 8th Cir.· 1981-02-18 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the pretrial and in-court identification procedures, as well as the prosecutor's conduct, did not violate due process, and the district court did not err in denying an evidentiary hearing.
• Jewell Jess Stone v. Cardwell
  620 F.2d 212· 9th Cir.· 1980-05-30 ·cited 12×
  The federal district court's finding that a state prisoner's guilty plea was not knowingly and voluntarily made is not clearly erroneous and is therefore affirmed.
• Jordan v. Estelle
  594 F.2d 144· 5th Cir.· 1979-04-30 ·cited 12×
  The court held that a habeas petitioner is entitled to an evidentiary hearing on claims of ineffective assistance of counsel when the record does not support the state's factual assertions.
• Harkins v. Wyrick
  552 F.2d 1308· 8th Cir.· 1977-04-14 ·cited 12×
  The court held that any error in denying a pretrial competency hearing was cured by a subsequent evidentiary hearing, and that the petitioner did not receive ineffective assistance of counsel.
• United States ex rel. Frederick Johnson v. Dep't OF Corr. Servs. OF the State of NEW York
  461 F.2d 956· 2d Cir.· 1972-05-01 ·cited 12×
  A defendant does not have a constitutional right to counsel at a post-indictment, pre-trial photographic identification session, and the procedure used was not impermissibly suggestive.
• Stidham v. Wingo
  452 F.2d 837· 6th Cir.· 1971-12-16 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the District Court erred in denying a habeas corpus petition without an evidentiary hearing when disputed issues of fact were presented.
• Chisholm v. Louie L. Wainwright
  427 F.2d 1138· 5th Cir.· 1970-06-26 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying a habeas corpus petition without a hearing, as the state court provided a full and fair hearing on the voluntariness of the guilty plea.
• Ryan v. Louie L. Wainwright
  424 F.2d 198· 5th Cir.· 1970-04-03 ·cited 12×
  Federal courts are not required to hold a second evidentiary hearing in habeas corpus cases if a full and fair hearing was held at the state level.
• Pineda v. Craven
  424 F.2d 369· 9th Cir.· 1970-03-16 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the right to challenge a search warrant under Aguilar v. Texas was not knowingly waived in this case.
• Walker v. Louie L. Wainwright
  409 F.2d 1311· 5th Cir.· 1969-04-03 ·cited 12×
  The court held that a petitioner cannot raise new claims for the first time on appeal and that the absence of counsel at a preliminary hearing does not require relief absent specific prejudice.
• Gomez v. Beto
  402 F.2d 766· 5th Cir.· 1968-11-08 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the district court properly denied the habeas corpus petition without a full evidentiary hearing, as the state court's findings were supported by the record and applicable law.
• Humphries v. LaMoyne Green
  397 F.2d 67· 6th Cir.· 1968-06-12 ·cited 12×
• Overton Thomas Anthony v. Fitzharris
  389 F.2d 657· 9th Cir.· 1968-01-30 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the district court erred in denying the habeas corpus petition without an evidentiary hearing, as the state court proceedings were insufficient to establish the voluntariness of the guilty plea.
• DeANGELO v. Louie L. Wainwright
  781 F.2d 1516· 11th Cir.· 1986-02-10 ·cited 11×
  The court held that the voluntariness of a statement for federal habeas review is a matter for independent federal determination, not subject to the presumption of correctness under 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d), and that the Stone v. Powell doctrine does not bar Fifth and Sixth Amendment
• Alvord v. Wainwright
  564 F. Supp. 459· M.D. Fla.· 1983-05-05 ·cited 11×
  The court held that a defendant's expressed unwillingness to raise a defense does not absolve counsel of the responsibility to investigate and present that defense, especially when the defense is the only plausible one.
• Blair v. Armontrout
  976 F.2d 1130· 8th Cir.· 1992-09-18 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the prosecutor's systematic use of peremptory challenges to exclude black jurors, coupled with appeals to racial prejudice in closing arguments, violated the defendant's right to a fair trial and entitled him to a new trial.
• Kavin Wayne Lincecum v. Collins
  958 F.2d 1271· 5th Cir.· 1992-04-07 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in refusing to instruct the jury on lesser included offenses, and that the district court did not err in denying an evidentiary hearing on claims of ineffective assistance of counsel and unconstitutionality of the death penalty stat
• Paradis v. A.J. Arave
  954 F.2d 1483· 9th Cir.· 1992-01-23 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the circumstantial evidence was sufficient to support the jury's finding that the murder occurred in Idaho, and that the admission of evidence relating to another murder for which the defendant was acquitted did not violate due process or double jeopardy. The
• Lafferty v. Cook
  949 F.2d 1546· 10th Cir.· 1991-12-09 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the trial court's determination of competency to stand trial, when supported by the record and applying the correct legal standard, is entitled to deference and should not be overturned on appeal.
• Anson Avery Maynard v. Dixon
  943 F.2d 407· 4th Cir.· 1991-08-19 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying the habeas petition, affirming the denial of summary judgment on all grounds.
• Hill v. Black
  932 F.2d 369· 5th Cir.· 1991-05-20 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the petitioner's eighth amendment claim was procedurally barred because he failed to show good cause for not raising it at trial and actual prejudice. The court also held that the petitioner was not entitled to a lesser included offense charge under state law.
• Hennessy v. Goldsmith
  929 F.2d 511· 9th Cir.· 1991-04-01 ·cited 10×
  The Ninth Circuit reversed the district court's grant of habeas corpus, holding that the state trial court's failure to instruct the jury on the 'voluntary release' element of kidnapping was harmless error.
• Becton v. Talmadge Barnett
  920 F.2d 1190· 4th Cir.· 1990-12-26 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court erred in denying a habeas corpus petition without an evidentiary hearing when the petitioner raised colorable claims of ineffective assistance of counsel regarding failure to investigate competency and failure to appeal.
• Carter v. Collins
  918 F.2d 1198· 5th Cir.· 1990-12-12 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the petitioner failed to demonstrate ineffective assistance of counsel because the attorney's advice regarding parole eligibility was not deficient and the petitioner failed to show prejudice.
• Blair v. Armontrout
  916 F.2d 1310· 8th Cir.· 1990-09-24 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the state court's factual finding that no deal existed between the prosecutor and a key witness was supported by the record and thus presumed correct, meaning no knowing use of perjured testimony occurred. The court also held that the defendant's waiver of Mir
• Bouchillon v. Collins
  907 F.2d 589· 5th Cir.· 1990-08-07 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the petitioner was denied effective assistance of counsel because his attorney failed to investigate his mental health history, which likely impacted the outcome of his guilty plea.
• Walton v. Lane
  852 F.2d 268· 7th Cir.· 1988-07-15 ·cited 10×
  The court held that despite a potentially suggestive pre-trial identification procedure, the victim's identification was sufficiently reliable under the totality of the circumstances to satisfy due process, and thus the habeas corpus writ should not have been granted.
• Clanton v. Muncy
  845 F.2d 1238· 4th Cir.· 1988-04-14 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court erred in granting a stay of execution because the petitioner's claims were successive, procedurally defaulted, and lacked substantial grounds for relief.
• 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.
• United States ex rel. Steve Shore v. O'Leary
  833 F.2d 663· 7th Cir.· 1987-11-09 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court correctly denied the habeas corpus petition because the state court's conviction was supported by sufficient evidence and the petitioner did not demonstrate a constitutional violation or the need for a federal evidentiary hearing.
• Johnston v. Makowski
  823 F.2d 387· 10th Cir.· 1987-07-07 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the jury's consideration of an unadmitted police report did not violate appellant's rights, nor did an impermissibly suggestive photographic identification, because under the totality of the circumstances, the identification was reliable.
• 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.
• Wilson v. Coon
  808 F.2d 688· 8th Cir.· 1987-01-08 ·cited 10×
  The court held that physical restraint by ambulance personnel for medical purposes at an accident scene, absent police domination, does not create an inherently coercive environment requiring Miranda warnings.
• Wood v. A.L. Lockhart
  809 F.2d 457· 8th Cir.· 1987-01-07 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the petitioner's claims of trial error, including the admission of testimony, denial of a change of venue, failure to strike biased jurors, and prosecutorial comments, did not rise to the level of a due process violation warranting habeas corpus relief.
• Duncan Peder McKENZIE, Jr. v. Risley
  801 F.2d 1519· 9th Cir.· 1986-10-08 ·cited 10×
  The court held that Sandstrom error on the element of intent is subject to harmless error analysis and that the death penalty statutes were constitutional. The court affirmed the denial of the habeas corpus petition.
• Johnson v. Crispus C. NIX
  763 F.2d 344· 8th Cir.· 1985-06-03 ·cited 10×·via 28 U.S.C. § 2254(D)(8)
  The court affirmed the denial of the habeas corpus petition, finding that any error in admitting incriminating statements was harmless and that the defendant's other claims regarding a fair trial and jury impartiality were without merit.
• Brofford v. Marshall
  751 F.2d 845· 6th Cir.· 1985-01-08 ·cited 10×
  The court should require an evidentiary hearing on the change of venue and shackling issues due to insufficient factual development in the record.
• Walker v. Maggio
  738 F.2d 714· 5th Cir.· 1984-08-20 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the petitioner failed to overcome the presumption of correctness accorded to the state court's finding that his guilty plea was knowingly and voluntarily entered.
• Smith v. E.P. Perini
  723 F.2d 478· 6th Cir.· 1983-12-15 ·cited 10×
  The dissenting judge argues that the identification procedures were unnecessarily suggestive and created a substantial likelihood of irreparable misidentification, violating due process.
• 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.