Application For Writ Of Habeas Corpus

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

• Bailey v. Henslee
  309 F.2d 840· 8th Cir.· 1962-11-20 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the original nine-month retrial period was not a reasonable time due to subsequent events and legal proceedings.
• In re the Application for a Writ of Habeas Corpus of Cosmo A. Daloia v. Rhay
  252 F.2d 768· 9th Cir.· 1958-02-14 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the sentencing statute did not violate equal protection and that the appellant's claims were without merit, affirming the denial of his habeas corpus application.
• Boyden v. Webb
  208 F.2d 201· 9th Cir.· 1953-11-27 ·cited 12×
  The court held that it had jurisdiction to hear the appeal because the application for a certificate of probable cause was timely filed, and that the district court did not err in denying the habeas corpus petition without a hearing, as the allegations did not demonstrate a viola
• Benesch v. Underwood
  132 F.2d 430· 6th Cir.· 1942-12-17 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the appellant's induction was lawful and the draft boards acted fairly, thus denying habeas corpus relief.
• Hawk v. Jones
  160 F.2d 807· 8th Cir.· 1947-04-18 ·cited 11×
  The court held that a federal court cannot grant habeas corpus relief until the petitioner has exhausted state remedies, including seeking relief via the writ of error coram nobis in Nebraska courts.
• Davis v. Blackburn
  789 F.2d 350· 5th Cir.· 1986-05-14 ·cited 10×
  A federal court need not grant an evidentiary hearing on a habeas petition if the alleged newly discovered evidence is discoverable by reasonable diligence and consists solely of a recanted trial witness affidavit rejected by the state trial court.
• Benny Williams v. Kullman
  722 F.2d 1048· 2d Cir.· 1983-11-28 ·cited 10×
  The court held that while sua sponte dismissal of the habeas petition was procedurally improper, the petition should ultimately be dismissed on the merits because the evidence presented at trial was sufficient to support the jury's finding of intent.
• McQUEEN v. Swenson
  560 F.2d 959· 8th Cir.· 1977-08-23 ·cited 10×
• Hendron v. Cowan
  532 F.2d 1081· 6th Cir.· 1976-04-06 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the guilty plea was voluntary under pre-Boykin standards and that Boykin v. Alabama should not be applied retroactively.
• Lockett v. Henderson
  484 F.2d 62· 5th Cir.· 1973-08-31 ·cited 10×
  A guilty plea is voluntary even if the accused is not specifically apprised of the right to trial by jury, privilege against self-incrimination, and right to confront accusers. The district court's memorandum of reasons was sufficient under Rule 52(a).
• Dickie Lee Lawrence v. Lake F. Russell
  430 F.2d 718· 6th Cir.· 1970-09-04 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the petitioner's guilty plea was voluntary and that the district court's denial of the writ of habeas corpus was correct.
• Wynn v. Page
  390 F.2d 545· 10th Cir.· 1968-03-08 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the trial court correctly denied the application to enforce its prior order because the prisoner had been released and was awaiting re-trial, and the prior order did not preclude re-trial.
• Bohm v. State OF Alaska
  320 F.2d 851· 9th Cir.· 1963-07-16 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the habeas corpus application must be dismissed because the State of Alaska was improperly named as the respondent instead of the warden of the penitentiary where the petitioner was held.
• Nolan v. Elbert V. Nash
  316 F.2d 776· 8th Cir.· 1963-05-08 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the District Court properly denied the application for a writ of habeas corpus without a hearing, as the issues raised were previously decided and the record supported those determinations.
• Caryl Chessman v. Harley O. Teets
  221 F.2d 276· 9th Cir.· 1955-04-07 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the appellant was not denied due process and waived his right to counsel.
• Coggins v. O'Brien
  188 F.2d 130· 1st Cir.· 1951-03-15 ·cited 10×
  The court affirmed the dismissal of the habeas corpus petition, finding that the state courts afforded the petitioner a constitutionally adequate opportunity to prove his claims.
• Floyd v. Meachum
  907 F.2d 347· 2d Cir.· 1990-06-29 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the cumulative effect of the prosecutor's repeated and improper remarks during summation was so prejudicial as to render the trial fundamentally unfair, denying the defendant his constitutional due process rights.
• Pickens v. Butler
  814 F.2d 237· 5th Cir.· 1987-04-14 ·cited 8×
  The Constitution does not require a final revocation hearing if parole revocation is mandatory by law due to a felony conviction.
• Ford v. Superintendent, Ky. State Penitentiary
  687 F.2d 870· 6th Cir.· 1982-09-09 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the magistrate abused discretion by refusing to hear crucial live testimony from a witness whose credibility was central to the petitioner's claim of constitutional violation.
• Dodd v. United States Marshal & Wash. State Bd. of Paroles & Pardons & Dir.
  439 F.2d 774· 2d Cir.· 1971-03-22 ·cited 8×
  A federal prisoner is not considered 'in custody' of a state for habeas corpus purposes unless that state has filed a detainer with the prisoner's custodian.
• Olvera v. Beto
  429 F.2d 131· 5th Cir.· 1970-07-02 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the case should be remanded to allow Texas state courts an opportunity to interpret the application of Burgett v. Texas to the penalty stage of a bifurcated trial, citing principles of comity and federalism.
• Darwin Murphy v. Turner
  426 F.2d 422· 10th Cir.· 1970-05-08 ·cited 8×
  The court held that parole revocation hearings do not require the full panoply of due process rights, only general fairness, and that the Board's actions met this standard.
• Dearinger v. Rhay
  421 F.2d 1086· 9th Cir.· 1970-01-28 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the applicant lacked standing to challenge the legality of his companion's arrest, as any illegality did not violate the applicant's rights.
• Bratcher v. McNAMARA
  415 F.2d 760· 9th Cir.· 1969-08-12 ·cited 8×
  A military enlistee seeking discharge as a conscientious objector must exhaust available administrative remedies before seeking federal court relief.
• Harris v. Maxwell
  337 F.2d 710· 6th Cir.· 1964-09-18 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court correctly dismissed the habeas corpus petition for failure to exhaust state remedies, as appellant had not presented his federal claims to the Ohio Supreme Court.
• Warren v. Richardson
  333 F.2d 781· 9th Cir.· 1964-06-16 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the defendant's absence from a hearing where his sentence was affirmed, under 18 U.S.C. § 4208(b), constituted an error requiring remand for a proper hearing, but not grounds to vacate the conviction.
• Sharp v. The State OF Ohio
  314 F.2d 799· 6th Cir.· 1963-03-18 ·cited 8×
  The court held that a petitioner alleging lack of counsel and understanding of a guilty plea is entitled to a hearing.
• Parker v. Ellis
  258 F.2d 937· 5th Cir.· 1958-08-29 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the state was not constitutionally obligated to provide counsel for a non-capital offense, and the trial was not fundamentally unfair.
• United States ex rel. Francesco Brancato v. Lehmann
  239 F.2d 663· 6th Cir.· 1956-11-21 ·cited 8×
• Wood v. Howard
  157 F.2d 807· 7th Cir.· 1946-11-14 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the petitioner knowingly and intelligently waived his right to counsel and a jury trial, and thus his due process rights were not violated.
• People of the United States Ex rel. Reno v. Ragen
  151 F.2d 447· 7th Cir.· 1945-10-24 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the State of Illinois had the right to return the petitioner involuntarily to serve his sentence.
• Romero v. Lynaugh
  884 F.2d 871· 5th Cir.· 1989-10-05 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the defendant's trial counsel provided constitutionally effective assistance, and the federal district court erred in granting habeas corpus relief.
• Rodriguez v. Scully
  788 F.2d 62· 2d Cir.· 1986-04-09 ·cited 6×
  The court affirmed the denial of the habeas corpus petition, but held that the district court should not have reached the merits due to procedural default.
• Loter v. Estelle
  546 F.2d 151· 5th Cir.· 1977-01-28 ·cited 6×
  The court held that a state prisoner is not denied his constitutional right to appeal when his court-appointed attorneys fail to perfect an appeal if the prisoner did not make known his desire to appeal.
• Jones v. Cupp
  452 F.2d 1091· 9th Cir.· 1971-12-29 ·cited 6×
  The court held that a guilty plea is valid even if induced by a prior coerced confession, provided the plea itself was voluntary and intelligently entered with competent counsel. It also held that the prospective application of a reduced criminal penalty does not violate equal pr
• Mitchell v. Salisbury
  443 F.2d 324· 6th Cir.· 1971-06-04 ·cited 6×
  The court affirmed the district court's finding that the petitioner had filed a timely notice of appeal, but modified the order to avoid directing the state court's actions.
• United States ex rel. Lee Pao FEN v. Esperdy
  423 F.2d 6· 2d Cir.· 1970-03-12 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the denial of a stay of deportation was not an abuse of discretion, as the alien's conduct was dilatory and lacked good faith.
• Barbosa v. Wilson
  385 F.2d 319· 9th Cir.· 1967-10-30 ·cited 6×
  The court held that a prior conviction dismissed under California Penal Code § 1203.4 is still considered a felony for sentencing purposes under Health and Safety Code § 11501, and that the appellant was not deprived of due process.
• Anders v. Turner
  379 F.2d 46· 4th Cir.· 1967-05-29 ·cited 6×
  The District Court erred in holding that the withdrawal of an appeal constituted a waiver of a federal claim regarding an involuntary guilty plea, especially when state courts had addressed the claim on its merits.
• Humphries v. The State OF Okla. & the Dist. Court of Garvin Cnty.
  373 F.2d 200· 10th Cir.· 1967-02-13 ·cited 6×
  The court held that a discrepancy in the date of a waiver of rights, coupled with an allegation of duress and lack of counsel, warrants a hearing to determine the waiver's validity.
• Yeaman v. United States
  326 F.2d 293· 9th Cir.· 1963-12-18 ·cited 6×
  The court held that a prior state sentence completed before the federal sentence was entered cannot be considered concurrent with the federal sentence. It also held that a hearing is not required when the merits of a habeas corpus petition can be determined from the record.
• NG Yip Yee v. Barber
  210 F.2d 613· 9th Cir.· 1954-02-04 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the district court lacked jurisdiction to entertain a habeas corpus petition from an individual detained pending exclusion proceedings, as the individual had not exhausted administrative remedies.
• Stillwell v. Looney
  207 F.2d 359· 10th Cir.· 1953-10-05 ·cited 6×
  The Federal Parole Board had jurisdiction to revoke the parole of a prisoner transferred to an institution designated by the Attorney General, as the amendment conferring this power was procedural.
• O'Connor v. Hunter
  192 F.2d 179· 10th Cir.· 1951-10-20 ·cited 6×
  The court held that good time earned under a military sentence, when confined in a civil institution, is computed at the statutory rate for civil institutions, not the military rate.
• Ekberg v. McGEE
  191 F.2d 625· 9th Cir.· 1951-08-31 ·cited 6×
• United States ex rel. DE George v. Jordan
  183 F.2d 768· 7th Cir.· 1950-07-10 ·cited 6×
  The court held that evading the payment of taxes on liquor, or conspiring to do so, does not constitute a crime involving moral turpitude under the Immigration Act of 1917, and therefore does not warrant deportation.
• Smith v. United States Parole Comm'n
  752 F.2d 1056· 5th Cir.· 1985-02-11 ·cited 5×
  The court held that a federal prisoner's claim that the Parole Commission denied him equal protection by delaying the execution of a parole violator's warrant due to his inability to post bail is without merit and speculative.
• Brown v. Frisbie
  178 F.2d 271· 6th Cir.· 1949-12-08 ·cited 5×
  The court held that the district court should have allowed the petitioner to present evidence supporting his factual allegations in his habeas corpus petition.
• Ex parte Aulday
  113 Fla. 70· Fla.· 1933-11-28 ·cited 5×
  Harry Aulday petitioned for habeas corpus relief, claiming the trial judge was disqualified due to prejudice after the judge refused to recuse himself when challenged under Florida law. The Florida Supreme Court held that habeas corpus is not the proper remedy to challenge a tria
• Rainer v. Dep't OF Corr.
  914 F.2d 1067· 8th Cir.· 1990-09-19 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the admission of prior bad acts evidence and the state investigator's involvement in defense expert testing did not violate the defendant's constitutional rights.