Application For Writ Of Habeas Corpus

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

• Barrett v. Hunter
  180 F.2d 510· 10th Cir.· 1950-02-14 ·cited 102×
  The dissenting judge believes that 28 U.S.C. § 2255 is not always a prerequisite to habeas corpus and can be inadequate, especially for prisoners facing practical difficulties. The judge would reverse and remand Barrett's case.
• Blair v. The People OF the State OF Cal.
  340 F.2d 741· 9th Cir.· 1965-01-06 ·cited 70×
  A state prisoner must exhaust state remedies for issues arising from new Supreme Court decisions before seeking federal habeas corpus relief.
• Caraway v. Beto
  421 F.2d 636· 5th Cir.· 1970-01-21 ·cited 51×
  The court affirmed the district court's grant of habeas corpus, finding that the petitioner was denied effective assistance of counsel.
• Johnson v. Beto
  466 F.2d 478· 5th Cir.· 1972-08-25 ·cited 48×
  A guilty plea induced by a prosecutor's promise, even if the prosecutor cannot guarantee the sentence, is involuntary and subject to collateral attack.
• Louis v. Blackburn
  630 F.2d 1105· 5th Cir.· 1980-11-19 ·cited 47×
  Due process requires a district judge to personally hear the testimony of witnesses when making an independent credibility determination that is inconsistent with the magistrate's findings.
• Thaddeus King, Jr. v. Beto
  429 F.2d 221· 5th Cir.· 1970-07-06 ·cited 42×
  The court held that the petitioner was denied effective assistance of counsel, violating his Sixth and Fourteenth Amendment rights.
• Wallace v. Heinze
  351 F.2d 39· 9th Cir.· 1965-09-15 ·cited 38×
  A guilty plea waives any claim that evidence was obtained through an unreasonable search, and a district court has inherent power to grant additional time for a return in a habeas corpus proceeding.
• Sammie Felder, Jr. v. W.J. Estelle, Jr.
  693 F.2d 549· 5th Cir.· 1982-12-14 ·cited 36×
  A state sovereign, through authorized representatives, can waive the habeas exhaustion requirement, as comity serves the state's sovereign interest.
• Eutues White v. Finkbeiner
  687 F.2d 885· 7th Cir.· 1982-03-26 ·cited 34×
  The court is compelled to concur in directing the writ to issue, finding no indication that the defendant initiated contact with officers after requesting counsel.
• Small v. Britton
  500 F.2d 299· 10th Cir.· 1974-07-30 ·cited 34×
  The court held that a parole revocation hearing is not required until a parole revocation warrant is executed, and incarceration in a state institution is a valid reason for delay in execution.
• Schnautz v. Beto
  416 F.2d 214· 5th Cir.· 1969-09-11 ·cited 33×
• Coley v. Alvis
  381 F.2d 870· 6th Cir.· 1967-09-06 ·cited 32×
  The court held that because the Ohio post-conviction relief statute, as construed by the Ohio Supreme Court, provides no effective state remedy for the appellant's claims, he is not required to exhaust state remedies before seeking federal habeas corpus relief.
• McLEOD v. Peterson
  283 F.2d 180· 3d Cir.· 1960-10-06 ·cited 32×
  The court held that the appellant's departure under the circumstances did not interrupt his continuous physical presence for the purpose of the statute, and the prior erroneous denial of discretionary relief should be reviewed.
• GAY v. Marcell Graham
  269 F.2d 482· 10th Cir.· 1959-07-29 ·cited 32×
  The court held that petitioners failed to demonstrate a substantial question regarding a denial of due process, and thus a certificate of probable cause should be denied.
• Caryl Chessman v. Harley O. Teets
  239 F.2d 205· 9th Cir.· 1956-10-18 ·cited 32×
• Jones v. Biddle
  131 F.2d 853· 8th Cir.· 1942-12-14 ·cited 32×
  The court held that a habeas corpus application must name the person with actual physical custody of the petitioner as the respondent, not a supervisor with only regulatory custody.
• Craig v. Warden Sam P. Garrison
  549 F.2d 306· 4th Cir.· 1977-02-07 ·cited 30×
  When a pro se litigant's notice of appeal is filed within the extension period, the court must advise the litigant of the requirements for excusable neglect before deeming it untimely.
• Davis v. Adult Parole Auth.
  610 F.2d 410· 6th Cir.· 1979-11-27 ·cited 28×
  The court held that the district court erred in applying Rule 9(a) as a strict statute of limitations, rather than as an invocation of the equitable doctrine of laches.
• State v. COX
  306 So. 2d 156· Fla. 2d DCA· 1974-11-01 ·cited 27×
  The State of Florida appeals a habeas corpus order granting Cox's application to prevent his extradition to California. The court holds that in extradition proceedings, a trial court's inquiry is narrowly limited to jurisdictional prerequisites and cannot consider guilt/innocence
• Wright v. Estelle
  549 F.2d 971· 5th Cir.· 1977-03-30 ·cited 23×
  The court held that even if the petitioner was deprived of a fundamental right to testify, it was harmless error beyond a reasonable doubt due to overwhelming evidence connecting him to the crime.
• Hamish Scott MacKAY v. McALEXANDER
  268 F.2d 35· 9th Cir.· 1959-06-09 ·cited 23×
  The court held that the deportation order and the denial of the application for suspension of deportation were valid, affirming the lower court's judgment.
• Kostal v. Tinsley
  337 F.2d 845· 10th Cir.· 1964-11-02 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in denying the writ of habeas corpus because the disciplinary actions taken by prison officials were within their authority and not cruel and inhuman.
• Winhoven v. Swope
  195 F.2d 181· 9th Cir.· 1952-02-28 ·cited 22×
  The court held that a federal prisoner seeking habeas corpus relief after denial of a motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 must demonstrate the inadequacy of the § 2255 remedy, and a second or successive § 2255 motion is generally not permitted.
• Smith v. O.L. McCOTTER
  786 F.2d 697· 5th Cir.· 1986-04-07 ·cited 20×
  A federal court reviewing a state conviction via habeas corpus is limited to federal constitutional claims, and a guilty plea waives most preceding claims, including alleged defects in the indictment or lack of personal service.
• Montes v. Jenkins
  581 F.2d 609· 7th Cir.· 1978-07-13 ·cited 20×
  The district court erred by dismissing habeas corpus petitions without considering factual allegations contradicting state court findings and by failing to determine if state remedies were ineffective.
• United States ex rel. Eugene Fitzgerald v. LaVALLEE
  461 F.2d 601· 2d Cir.· 1972-05-23 ·cited 20×
  The court affirmed the district court's grant of habeas corpus, finding that the petitioner's guilty plea was involuntary due to his heroin influence at the time.
• Frace v. Russell
  341 F.2d 901· 3d Cir.· 1965-02-19 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying the inmate's application for a writ of habeas corpus, as he had not exhausted his state remedies and the accusations of prejudice were unsupported.
• Graves v. Beto
  424 F.2d 524· 5th Cir.· 1970-04-03 ·cited 18×
• Thomas v. Beto
  423 F.2d 642· 5th Cir.· 1970-02-25 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the petitioner was denied effective assistance of counsel when his attorney failed to advise him of his right to appeal, thus entitling him to an out-of-time appeal or retrial.
• Krieger v. Brig. Gen. James Terry
  413 F.2d 73· 9th Cir.· 1969-06-25 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the district court did not err in dismissing the habeas corpus application without prejudice for failure to exhaust administrative remedies, but that the district court should have held the proceeding in abeyance rather than dismissing it.
• Larios v. Madigan
  299 F.2d 98· 9th Cir.· 1962-01-26 ·cited 18×
  A federal sentence does not begin to run until the prisoner is received at a place of detention to await transportation for service of the sentence, and a sentencing judge's recommendation for concurrent state confinement is not binding.
• Linden v. Dickson
  287 F.2d 55· 9th Cir.· 1961-01-31 ·cited 18×
  The court held that a district court is not required to hold a hearing or examine the state court record if the allegations of fact in a habeas corpus application, even if true, would not entitle the applicant to relief.
• Singleton v. Chesley H. Looney
  218 F.2d 526· 10th Cir.· 1955-01-03 ·cited 18×
  A prisoner conditionally released under 18 U.S.C. § 4164 must serve the remainder of their original sentence upon violation of release conditions, even if they protested the conditions, and is not entitled to credit for time spent on parole.
• In re United States Parole Comm'n
  793 F.2d 338· D.C. Cir.· 1986-06-17 ·cited 16×
  The District Court did not err in asserting jurisdiction over Pearson's claims for declaratory and injunctive relief, nor did it abuse its discretion in denying the Commission's motion to transfer the case.
• Sassoon v. Stynchombe
  654 F.2d 371· 5th Cir.· 1981-08-28 ·cited 16×
  A violation of the Interstate Agreement on Detainers does not require federal habeas corpus relief if the prisoner suffered no prejudice from the violation.
• Fouquette v. Bernard
  198 F.2d 96· 9th Cir.· 1952-02-29 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the record presented a substantial question warranting a certificate of probable cause and a stay of execution, indicating a potential due process violation.
• Hallowell v. Hunter
  186 F.2d 873· 10th Cir.· 1951-01-26 ·cited 16×
  An application for a writ of habeas corpus on grounds of lack of counsel or mental incompetency to waive counsel will not be entertained if the sentencing court denied relief under § 2255 and the applicant fails to allege facts showing the § 2255 remedy is inadequate.
• United States ex rel. Peters v. Ragen
  178 F.2d 377· 7th Cir.· 1949-12-02 ·cited 15×
  The court held that federal courts must require exhaustion of newly available state remedies before entertaining habeas corpus petitions, even if the new remedy was enacted after the lower court's decision.
• Innes v. Dalsheim
  864 F.2d 974· 2d Cir.· 1988-12-29 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the defendant's waiver of his right to a jury trial was not knowing and intelligent due to the ambiguity in the trial court's explanation of the consequences of breaching the plea agreement.
• Watson v. Colonel O.L. McCOTTER
  782 F.2d 143· 10th Cir.· 1986-01-21 ·cited 14×
  The military gave full and fair consideration to the petitioner's ineffective assistance of counsel claim, thus the federal court was not required to grant the writ.
• Chambers v. Beto
  428 F.2d 791· 5th Cir.· 1970-06-15 ·cited 14×
  A guilty plea entered on advice of competent counsel is not rendered involuntary by allegations of illegally seized evidence or a coerced confession.
• Wilson v. Bailey
  375 F.2d 663· 4th Cir.· 1967-03-22 ·cited 14×
  A state prisoner's knowing and intelligent decision to withdraw his appeal, even if based on counsel's advice about potential consequences, does not constitute a "deliberate bypass" of state remedies that would bar federal habeas corpus review, but failure to object at trial to i
• Benjamin v. Hunter
  176 F.2d 269· 10th Cir.· 1949-06-29 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the petitioner was not entitled to immediate release, as his release date, computed under either the prior law or the new statute, would not be affected in a manner that would result in his immediate discharge.
• Sellers v. Estelle
  651 F.2d 1074· 5th Cir.· 1981-07-27 ·cited 13×
  The court held that the prosecution's suppression of evidence favorable to the accused, if material, violates due process, and remanded for an evidentiary hearing to determine if such evidence was withheld.
• Norman v. O.L. McCOTTER
  765 F.2d 504· 5th Cir.· 1985-07-15 ·cited 12×
  The court held that while the district court erred in converting a motion to dismiss to summary judgment without notice, the error was harmless. The court affirmed the denial of the habeas corpus petition, finding no reversible error in the petitioner's claims.
• 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.
• United States ex rel. William C. Stubbs v. Mancusi
  442 F.2d 561· 2d Cir.· 1971-04-19 ·cited 12×
  The admission of prior testimony from a witness who was not made available for cross-examination at retrial, despite the prosecution's failure to make a good-faith effort to secure his presence, violated the Confrontation Clause and was not harmless error.
• Newman v. Rodriguez
  375 F.2d 712· 10th Cir.· 1967-04-04 ·cited 12×
  The court held that New Mexico's denial of credit for time served on a void sentence upon reconviction does not violate the Equal Protection Clause.
• United States ex rel. Grigorios Stellas v. Esperdy
  366 F.2d 266· 2d Cir.· 1966-08-30 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the regulation providing for automatic revocation of an approved visa petition upon withdrawal by a citizen spouse is invalid because it conflicts with the statutory requirement of 'good and sufficient cause' and denies due process.
• Chester v. The People OF the State OF Cal.
  355 F.2d 778· 9th Cir.· 1966-01-27 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the district court erred in not considering all grounds for relief and in failing to determine if an evidentiary hearing was necessary for those grounds not previously adjudicated.