Application For Writ Of Habeas Corpus

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

• Caesar Harmason v. Smith
  888 F.2d 1527· 5th Cir.· 1989-12-01 ·cited 4×
  A guilty plea is not rendered involuntary by an attorney's prediction of a lesser sentence if the defendant affirms in open court that no promises were made and understands the potential maximum sentence.
• Tijerina v. Thornburgh
  884 F.2d 861· 5th Cir.· 1989-10-05 ·cited 4×
  The Parole Commission has the ultimate discretion to decide whether a parole violator term runs concurrently or consecutively with a new sentence, even if the sentencing judge recommends concurrent service.
• Flittie v. Solem
  882 F.2d 325· 8th Cir.· 1989-08-14 ·cited 4×
  The court held that a petition attacking a fully served prior conviction, even if used for sentence enhancement, does not establish subject matter jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 2254(a) because the petitioner is not in custody pursuant to that prior conviction.
• Corcoran v. Wyrick
  757 F.2d 207· 8th Cir.· 1985-03-18 ·cited 4×
  The court held that a state court's factual finding regarding a habeas petitioner's understanding of potential punishment is presumed correct under 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d), and an erroneous statement by the sentencing judge does not invalidate a guilty plea if the petitioner was othe
• Montgomery v. Bordenkircher
  620 F.2d 127· 6th Cir.· 1980-04-28 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the petitioner's prior convictions were valid and that the habitual criminal statute does not violate double jeopardy principles.
• Smiley v. State OF Cal.
  442 F.2d 1026· 9th Cir.· 1971-05-17 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court erred in denying an evidentiary hearing on the voluntariness of the appellant's confession and on whether the failure to object to its admission constituted a deliberate bypass of state court procedures.
• Stack v. Bomar
  354 F.2d 200· 6th Cir.· 1965-12-30 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the appellant was not deprived of effective assistance of counsel, as his attorney's advice was based on the prevailing Tennessee law at the time, and the guilty plea was voluntary and informed.
• Wallace v. Willingham
  351 F.2d 299· 10th Cir.· 1965-10-14 ·cited 4×
  Habeas corpus is not an available remedy when Section 2255 provides an adequate remedy, even if that remedy was previously erroneously denied.
• Estep v. United States
  316 F.2d 767· 9th Cir.· 1963-04-10 ·cited 4×
  A federal prisoner seeking to challenge a sentence must first utilize the remedy provided by 28 U.S.C. § 2255 in the sentencing court, and habeas corpus is only available if that remedy is shown to be inadequate or ineffective.
• Coy Litchfield v. Tinsley
  281 F.2d 486· 10th Cir.· 1960-06-16 ·cited 4×
  The federal court denied habeas corpus because the prisoner failed to exhaust state remedies by not timely seeking a writ of error for his conviction.
• Booth v. United States
  198 F.2d 991· 9th Cir.· 1952-08-21 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court lacked jurisdiction to issue an order to show cause against the U.S. Marshal, but the denial of the habeas corpus application is sustained because the petitioner is lawfully held under a valid state sentence.
• In re Abramson
  196 F.2d 261· 3d Cir.· 1952-05-01 ·cited 4×
  The court held that an induction order is not legally 'mailed' if it is not properly addressed, and a registrant's right to reclassification based on pregnancy is preserved if proof is filed before the board properly mails the order.
• Willis v. Utecht
  185 F.2d 210· 8th Cir.· 1950-11-06 ·cited 4×
  The court held that applicants had not exhausted their state remedies because they failed to follow the proper procedural steps for seeking a writ of habeas corpus in Minnesota courts.
• Kermit Gabel v. O.L. McCOTTER
  803 F.2d 814· 5th Cir.· 1986-10-29 ·cited 3×
  State evidentiary rulings, even if erroneous, do not constitute constitutional error cognizable in federal habeas corpus proceedings.
• Chromiak v. Field
  406 F.2d 502· 9th Cir.· 1969-01-24 ·cited 3×
  The court held that a prisoner's claim that a state statute requiring executive concurrence for probation is unconstitutional does not present a federal question, and that requiring a defendant to bear the burden of proof for a judge disqualification motion is permissible.
• Harriman v. Lynn
  901 F.2d 64· 5th Cir.· 1990-05-15 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the Supreme Court's decision in Arizona v. Roberson, which prohibited further interrogation after a suspect invokes the right to counsel, announced a "new rule" and therefore does not apply retroactively to cases on collateral review where the conviction was f
• Tyndall v. Gunter
  840 F.2d 617· 8th Cir.· 1988-03-03 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the Nebraska state court retained jurisdiction over pending criminal matters despite the retrocession of jurisdiction to the federal government, and thus the habeas corpus application was properly denied.
• Sterling Williams v. A.L. Lockhart
  837 F.2d 324· 8th Cir.· 1988-01-19 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court correctly dismissed the habeas corpus application because the appellant's guilty pleas were voluntary and his sentences did not violate the double jeopardy clause.
• Mathes v. Pierpont
  725 F.2d 77· 8th Cir.· 1984-01-11 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the State of Oklahoma did not waive its jurisdiction over the appellant by releasing a detainer and failing to file another for several years, as the delay did not rise to the level of gross negligence required for waiver.
• Antonelli v. Ralston
  609 F.2d 340· 8th Cir.· 1979-11-01 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court should have stayed proceedings to allow prisoners to seek administrative relief before denying their petition for injunctive relief.
• Thomas v. Estelle
  588 F.2d 170· 5th Cir.· 1979-01-22 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the claim regarding appearance in jail clothing must be remanded for a factual determination of whether an objection was properly made, as this could establish a denial of a fair trial.
• Cialkowski v. Franzen
  545 F.2d 1155· 8th Cir.· 1976-12-20 ·cited 2×
  The dismissal of a direct state criminal appeal by the U.S. Supreme Court for want of a substantial federal question constitutes an actual adjudication that precludes subsequent federal habeas corpus relief, absent subsequent doctrinal developments.
• Cook v. Gray
  530 F.2d 133· 7th Cir.· 1976-03-02 ·cited 2×
  A sentencing judge's passing reference to a belief in a defendant's perjury, which is apparent to the judge and not subsequently relied upon, does not constitute a constitutional deprivation warranting federal habeas corpus relief.
• Dames v. Louie L. Wainwright
  491 F.2d 1098· 5th Cir.· 1974-04-01 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the defendant's contention that he was entitled to more credit for time served was without merit, as he received the bargained-for sentence and was not punished for exercising post-conviction rights.
• Douglas v. Nixon
  459 F.2d 325· 6th Cir.· 1972-04-27 ·cited 2×
  The court affirmed the district court's judgment, constrained by prior precedent.
• Thomas v. Beto
  452 F.2d 1072· 5th Cir.· 1971-12-22 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying the habeas corpus writ without a hearing, as the state court's findings were supported by the record and not clearly erroneous.
• Grover Cleveland McDANIEL v. Jones
  447 F.2d 490· 5th Cir.· 1971-08-27 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the dismissal of both the habeas corpus application and the civil rights action were improper and required reversal.
• Johnson v. Beto
  436 F.2d 1063· 5th Cir.· 1971-01-05 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the federal district court judgment denying habeas corpus relief should be affirmed because the appellant failed to exhaust his state remedies.
• Vertree v. Louie L. Wainwright
  184 So. 2d 420· Fla.· 1966-03-23 ·cited 2×
  The Florida Supreme Court discharged a writ of habeas corpus, allowing the petitioner to reapply for relief in the trial court. This was based on a subsequent ruling that might entitle him to an evidentiary hearing.
• Jones v. Davis
  336 F.2d 594· 6th Cir.· 1964-09-22 ·cited 2×
  The District Court properly denied the writ of habeas corpus because the petitioner has an available post-conviction remedy in the state courts.
• Gibbs v. Beto
  332 F.2d 442· 5th Cir.· 1964-05-22 ·cited 2×
  The court held that advising a guilty plea to avoid a mandatory life sentence, even with knowledge of prior insanity commitments, does not constitute ineffective assistance of counsel.
• Simcox v. Harris
  324 F.2d 376· 8th Cir.· 1963-11-18 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the denial of the writ of habeas corpus was proper, as the appellant remained subject to military law and court-martial jurisdiction.
• United States ex rel. Leo Carson v. Wilkins
  292 F.2d 321· 2d Cir.· 1961-07-06 ·cited 2×
  A state court conviction based on a guilty plea, even without counsel, may stand if the defendant knowingly and intentionally waived the offer of counsel and the proceedings were not fundamentally unfair.
• United States ex rel. Frank Cutrone v. FAY
  289 F.2d 470· 2d Cir.· 1961-04-28 ·cited 2×
  A state prisoner seeking federal habeas corpus relief based on a state conviction used for increased punishment must first exhaust available state remedies to challenge that conviction and its classification as a felony under the sentencing state's law.
• Williams v. Heritage
  250 F.2d 390· 9th Cir.· 1957-05-29 ·cited 2×
  A federal prisoner seeking to challenge his sentence must first apply to the sentencing court under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 before seeking habeas corpus in another district.
• United States ex rel. Steve Avramovich v. Lehmann
  235 F.2d 260· 6th Cir.· 1956-08-01 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to sustain the deportation order under the Internal Security Act of 1950, and the judiciary cannot question the wisdom of Congress's deportation policies.
• Lynch v. Swope
  172 F.2d 301· 9th Cir.· 1949-01-19 ·cited 2×
  The court held that a habeas corpus petition cannot be used as a substitute for a direct appeal when the petitioner had the opportunity to appeal a conviction.
• 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.
• Ruark v. Tinsley
  350 F.2d 315· 10th Cir.· 1965-08-03 ·cited 1×
  The court held that the lower court properly denied the application for a writ of habeas corpus because the petitioners had not exhausted their state remedies under Rule 35(b) of the Colorado Rules of Criminal Procedure.
• State of Fla. ex rel. Morgan Simpson v. Mayo
  95 So. 2d 424· Fla.· 1957-05-22 ·cited 1×
  This habeas corpus petition alleged that Simpson was convicted of robbery based on false testimony induced by prosecutorial threats and promises. The Florida Supreme Court, after appointing a commissioner to take testimony, found no evidence that the prosecution knowingly used fa
• Baxter v. Sec'y, Dep't of Corr.
  M.D. Fla.· 2024-07-30
  The court held that the petitioner's federal habeas corpus application was time-barred because his state post-conviction relief petition was not properly filed and thus did not toll the statute of limitations.
• Gant v. Sec'y, Dep't of Corr.
  M.D. Fla.· 2024-07-22
  The court held that the habeas corpus application was untimely filed and therefore dismissed.
• Henderson v. Gualtieri
  M.D. Fla.· 2024-07-11
  Henderson, a state prisoner, sought federal habeas corpus relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 challenging a state speedy trial violation. The district court dismissed the petition as premature for lack of exhaustion of state remedies and because § 2241 is limited to federal constitutio
• Schuller v. Sec'y, Dep't of Corr. (Hillsborough County)
  M.D. Fla.· 2024-06-14
  The court held that the habeas corpus application was time-barred and the applicant was not entitled to equitable tolling.
• Manuel v. Sec'y, Dep't of Corr. (Polk County)
  M.D. Fla.· 2024-05-03
  The court held that the petitioner failed to show that the state appellate court unreasonably denied his claim that the charging document and verdict form resulted in a federal due process violation.
• Smiley v. Sec'y, Dep't of Corr. (Pinellas County)
  M.D. Fla.· 2024-02-23
  The court denied the inmate's motion to proceed in forma pauperis without prejudice and denied an inmate's request to appear as amicus curiae.
• Farrior v. Sec'y, Dep't of Corr. (Pinellas County)
  M.D. Fla.· 2024-02-23
  The court held that the habeas corpus application was time-barred because it was filed more than three years after the federal limitation period expired.
• Hagen v. Sec'y, Dep't of Corr.
  M.D. Fla.· 2020-05-13
  A man convicted of sexually abusing his girlfriend's nine-year-old daughter filed a federal habeas corpus petition challenging his conviction, arguing that certain trial court errors violated his constitutional rights. The district court denied relief, finding that some claims we
• Newsome v. Singletary
  637 So. 2d 9· Fla. 2d DCA· 1994-05-06
  Prisoner Newsome appealed the dismissal of his habeas corpus and rule 1.630 application challenging a DOC disciplinary action. The court reversed, holding that Newsome's claim was not an untimely complaint for common law certiorari, and that different remedies apply depending on
• Starchild v. Fed. Bureau OF Prisons
  973 F.2d 610· 8th Cir.· 1992-08-19
  The court held that time spent on highly restricted house arrest is not creditable as jail time for sentence credit purposes.