Exhaustion Of State Remedies

3,028 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · browse and sort

• Pinkus v. Pitchess
  429 F.2d 416· 9th Cir.· 1970-06-29 ·cited 15×
• Peinado v. Adult Auth. OF the Dep't OF Corr.
  405 F.2d 1185· 9th Cir.· 1969-01-15 ·cited 15×
• Hunt v. Eyman
  405 F.2d 384· 9th Cir.· 1968-12-27 ·cited 15×
  The court held that an illegal extradition does not entitle a prisoner to a writ of habeas corpus, and a state's application of the M'Naghten rule for insanity is constitutional. The recidivist issue was moot.
• Seymour v. Ellis
  196 F.2d 495· 5th Cir.· 1952-04-22 ·cited 15×
  The court held that the appeal should be dismissed because the prisoner had not exhausted state remedies and the contention was without merit.
• 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.
• Caswell v. Joseph Ryan (Superintendent)
  953 F.2d 853· 3d Cir.· 1992-01-13 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the prisoner's claims were procedurally defaulted due to failure to exhaust state remedies and that he failed to demonstrate sufficient cause and prejudice to overcome the default.
• Fruit v. Norris
  905 F.2d 1147· 8th Cir.· 1990-06-11 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the dismissal of the Eighth Amendment claim was improper because the inmates presented sufficient evidence of a prima facie violation, including dangers beyond toxic gases, to survive a Rule 41(b) dismissal.
• Bressman v. Hal Farrier
  900 F.2d 1305· 8th Cir.· 1990-04-19 ·cited 14×
  The court held that claims seeking restoration of good-time credits must generally be brought as habeas corpus petitions, requiring exhaustion of state remedies, while claims for damages or declaratory relief not affecting confinement length may proceed under § 1983.
• Mayo v. Lynaugh
  893 F.2d 683· 5th Cir.· 1990-01-23 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the state waived its procedural default defense by failing to raise it in the district court, and that the jury instructions in the sentencing phase prevented the jury from giving full effect to the defendant's mitigating evidence.
• Shaddy v. Clarke
  890 F.2d 1016· 8th Cir.· 1989-11-28 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the petitioner's habeas corpus claim is procedurally barred due to his failure to file a timely appeal in state court, and he has not exhausted state remedies to establish cause for this default.
• Mathis v. Hood
  851 F.2d 612· 2d Cir.· 1988-07-14 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the petitioner had exhausted state remedies to the extent they were available and effective, and that the state's delay in deciding his appeal violated his due process rights.
• Normand Gagne v. Fair
  835 F.2d 6· 1st Cir.· 1987-12-10 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the petitioner failed to exhaust his state remedies because he did not fairly present the substance of his federal habeas claim to the state courts. Therefore, the petition should be dismissed.
• Martin v. Demma
  831 F.2d 69· 5th Cir.· 1987-10-28 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the date of receipt of the complaint by the clerk, not the formal filing date, governs the commencement of an action for statute of limitations purposes.
• Cassettari v. Cnty. OF Nev.
  824 F.2d 735· 9th Cir.· 1987-08-10 ·cited 14×
  A Fifth Amendment taking claim is premature until state compensation procedures have been utilized and denied. A Section 1983 claim requires a deprivation of a federal right, which does not occur until just compensation is denied after exhausting state remedies.
• Prather v. Rees
  822 F.2d 1418· 6th Cir.· 1987-07-06 ·cited 14×
  The court agrees that the exhaustion requirement could be waived if state remedies were not exhausted, but finds it unnecessary to decide the exhaustion issue.
• Delmus Punton v. The City OF Seattle
  805 F.2d 1378· 9th Cir.· 1986-12-09 ·cited 14×
  The Washington state court judgment reinstating Punton and awarding back pay does not preclude him from bringing a separate § 1983 action for damages and attorney's fees.
• Mosley v. Captain Moran
  798 F.2d 182· 7th Cir.· 1986-08-04 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the Illinois statute, as construed, does not require the Prisoner Review Board to review revocations of 'good time' credits, only 'good conduct' credits. Therefore, Mosley's claim for habeas relief based on the lack of such review fails.
• United States ex rel. Willie Buckhana & Tony McGhee v. Lane
  787 F.2d 230· 7th Cir.· 1986-03-26 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the deputy sheriff's communication to the jury was harmless because the jury had already reached verdicts on the petitioners' guilt before the communication occurred, and therefore, the petitioners' due process rights were not violated.
• Waldo E. Granberry v. Mizell
  780 F.2d 14· 7th Cir.· 1985-12-26 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the petitioner failed to exhaust state remedies by not seeking a writ of mandamus in the lower Illinois courts, despite seeking it in the Illinois Supreme Court.
• Lindquist v. Darrol Gardner
  770 F.2d 876· 9th Cir.· 1985-09-09 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the appellant failed to exhaust his state judicial remedies by not properly utilizing Idaho's Uniform Post-Conviction Procedure Act before seeking federal habeas corpus relief.
• Dyer v. Ponte
  749 F.2d 84· 1st Cir.· 1984-11-28 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the joint enterprise jury instruction, despite omitting the element of intent, did not violate due process given the specific context of the trial and the jury charge as a whole. The court also expressed doubts about whether the petitioner adequately exhausted
• Vail v. Procunier
  747 F.2d 277· 5th Cir.· 1984-11-09 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the appellant's claims were without merit and denied his application for a certificate of probable cause and leave to appeal in forma pauperis.
• Buck v. Green
  743 F.2d 1567· 11th Cir.· 1984-10-16 ·cited 14×
  A state prisoner is not required to seek discretionary review in the state supreme court if that court's jurisdiction is limited, nor must they seek collateral review of issues already raised on direct appeal.
• James Banks, Jr. v. McGOUGAN
  717 F.2d 186· 5th Cir.· 1983-10-14 ·cited 14×
  State courts are not constitutionally required to establish a factual basis for a guilty plea unless the defendant asserts innocence or the court is otherwise put on notice.
• Hall v. State OF Ala.
  700 F.2d 1333· 11th Cir.· 1983-03-21 ·cited 14×
  An escape from state custody constitutes a procedural waiver of the right to seek post-conviction relief in state court, thereby precluding exhaustion of state remedies and foreclosing federal habeas corpus review.
• Ventura v. Hoyt C. Cupp
  690 F.2d 740· 9th Cir.· 1982-10-21 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the district court must determine whether the petitioner exhausted state remedies, considering potential excuses for non-exhaustion, before ruling on the merits of the habeas petition.
• Tyronne J. Mitchell v. Maggio
  679 F.2d 77· 5th Cir.· 1982-06-25 ·cited 14×
  The court held that an attorney's status as a part-time city prosecutor does not inherently create an actual conflict of interest violating the Sixth Amendment when representing a defendant in state court, absent proof of divided loyalties or adverse attorney-client relationships
• Miller v. Estelle
  677 F.2d 1080· 5th Cir.· 1982-06-10 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the presumption of prejudice from third-party jury contact, established in Remmer v. United States, does not extend to the sentencing phase of a bifurcated trial.
• Doescher v. Estelle
  666 F.2d 285· 5th Cir.· 1982-01-25 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the search warrant was validly issued based on probable cause, despite allegations of false statements in the affidavit, because sufficient corroborating information remained even if the challenged statements were disregarded.
• Stewart v. Estelle
  634 F.2d 998· 5th Cir.· 1981-01-23 ·cited 14×
  Failure to comply with state procedural rules does not, in itself, raise a federal constitutional question cognizable in federal habeas corpus. A mixed petition containing exhausted and unexhausted claims must be dismissed without prejudice.
• Rowell v. Oesterle
  626 F.2d 437· 5th Cir.· 1980-09-24 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the district court had subject matter jurisdiction to entertain the petition and that Florida was not obligated to provide free legal counsel in this civil custody dispute.
• Raanan Katz v. King
  627 F.2d 568· 1st Cir.· 1980-07-29 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the petitioner's claims were largely unexhausted in state court or lacked constitutional merit, and that any procedural defects in sentencing were cured by subsequent proceedings.
• Pruitt v. Housewright
  624 F.2d 851· 8th Cir.· 1980-07-09 ·cited 14×
  The dissenting judge would remand the case to the district court for further inquiry into the petitioner's claims of new evidence suggesting his conviction may have been based on incorrect testimony.
• Fillippini v. Ristaino
  585 F.2d 1163· 1st Cir.· 1978-11-07 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the appellant competently and intelligently waived his right to counsel and that the in-court identification was not constitutionally infirm.
• Moore v. Duckworth
  581 F.2d 639· 7th Cir.· 1978-07-25 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the petitioner had not exhausted state remedies for his claims regarding memory erasure and speedy trial, and that his conviction was not devoid of evidentiary support regarding sanity.
• Sutton v. Lash
  576 F.2d 738· 7th Cir.· 1978-05-22 ·cited 14×
  The court held that federal courts should be cautious in granting habeas relief when numerous factors weigh against it, particularly after a significant lapse of time.
• Allen v. Cnty. Court
  568 F.2d 998· 2d Cir.· 1977-11-29 ·cited 14×
  The court affirms the district court's judgment, but the concurring opinion argues for affirming on the ground that the statute is unconstitutional as applied, not on its face.
• Bonner v. Wyrick
  563 F.2d 1293· 8th Cir.· 1977-10-25 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the appellants failed to exhaust state remedies on two issues and affirmed the dismissal of their habeas corpus petitions on the remaining issues.
• Blake v. Morford
  563 F.2d 248· 6th Cir.· 1977-10-07 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the appellant was not denied due process because the common law indictment form used in Tennessee permitted evidence of underlying felonies to prove premeditation for first-degree murder, and thus he received fair notice of the charges.
• Rheuark v. Shaw
  547 F.2d 1257· 5th Cir.· 1977-03-03 ·cited 14×
  A prisoner's suit against a state court clerk and stenographer for failure to forward a transcript is a civil rights action, not a habeas corpus petition.
• Martin v. Parratt
  549 F.2d 50· 8th Cir.· 1977-01-26 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the Nebraska habitual criminal statute did not violate due process or equal protection, nor did its application constitute cruel and unusual punishment. The court also found no denial of a fair trial due to alleged prosecutorial misconduct.
• Young v. State OF Ark.
  533 F.2d 1079· 8th Cir.· 1976-04-22 ·cited 14×
  The court held that a federal habeas petition must be dismissed if the petitioner has not exhausted available state remedies for the claims raised.
• Loyd Jasper Ange, Jr. v. Paderick
  521 F.2d 1066· 4th Cir.· 1975-07-23 ·cited 14×
  The court held that a district court's recommendation for a federal prisoner to serve his sentence in a state facility has no legal effect and does not entitle the prisoner to credit for the period between the recommendation and actual transfer. However, a claim for credit on a s
• Ruetz v. Lash
  500 F.2d 1225· 7th Cir.· 1974-07-22 ·cited 14×
  An escape does not automatically constitute a deliberate bypass of state remedies for habeas corpus relief if the defendant returns to custody before the state court rules on their appeal.
• Ryan v. United States
  485 F.2d 295· 8th Cir.· 1973-10-03 ·cited 14×
  The court held that a motion to vacate sentence was properly dismissed because the sentencing judge explicitly stated the sentence would be the same regardless of prior convictions, and the prior state convictions had not been challenged in state court.
• United States ex rel. Pasquale Delle Rose v. LaVALLEE
  468 F.2d 1288· 2d Cir.· 1972-10-27 ·cited 14×
  The dissenting judge would remand the case to allow the state court to clarify its factual findings regarding the voluntariness of the confessions before the federal district court holds a new evidentiary hearing.
• Benny Reynolds, Jr. v. Louie L. Wainwright
  460 F.2d 1026· 5th Cir.· 1972-03-02 ·cited 14×
  The court affirmed the district court's denial of habeas corpus relief, finding that state remedies were not exhausted, but conditioned the affirmance on Florida's allowance of an out-of-time appeal.
• Belbin v. Picard
  454 F.2d 202· 1st Cir.· 1972-02-02 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the district court correctly dismissed the habeas corpus petition for failure to exhaust state remedies.
• Burroughs v. Louie L. Wainwright
  454 F.2d 1165· 5th Cir.· 1972-01-26 ·cited 14×
  The court held that a state prisoner must exhaust all available state remedies before seeking federal habeas corpus relief.
• Blackwell v. Wolff
  454 F.2d 48· 8th Cir.· 1972-01-24 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the federal district court should not have reached the issues of petitioner's segregation and counsel's competency without the petitioner first exhausting state remedies.