Exhaustion Of State Remedies

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

• Daniels v. Nelson
  453 F.2d 340· 9th Cir.· 1972-01-04 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the petitioner failed to exhaust his state remedies because his current claims regarding the voluntariness of his confession and the adequacy of the appellate record had not been fully presented to the California courts.
• Tyler v. Swenson
  440 F.2d 621· 8th Cir.· 1971-04-02 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the district court correctly dismissed the habeas corpus petition without prejudice because the appellant had not exhausted available state remedies for his claims regarding pretrial identification and hearsay evidence.
• Hill
  440 F.2d 34· 5th Cir.· 1971-03-11 ·cited 14×
  The court affirmed the denial of habeas corpus relief, finding that the petitioner's claims were either previously adjudicated by state courts, not sufficiently prejudicial, or not properly exhausted.
• United States ex rel. Nelson Miner v. Erickson
  428 F.2d 623· 8th Cir.· 1970-06-05 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the petitioner did not make an intelligent and understanding waiver of his right to counsel due to his limited capacity and lack of comprehension of the charges and defenses.
• Smith v. Schneckloth
  414 F.2d 680· 9th Cir.· 1969-07-22 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the inmate's complaint failed to state a cause of action under the Civil Rights Act for denial of equal protection or cruel and unusual punishment.
• United States ex rel. George Fink v. Rundle
  414 F.2d 542· 3d Cir.· 1969-06-24 ·cited 14×
  The dissenting judge would affirm the district court's denial of the habeas corpus petition, finding the relator's claims regarding his guilty plea were without merit.
• Reese v. Cardwell
  410 F.2d 1125· 6th Cir.· 1969-05-27 ·cited 14×
  The court held that evidentiary rulings by a state trial court, absent a constitutional violation, are not reviewable in a federal habeas corpus proceeding.
• United States ex rel. Stanley Howard v. Russell
  405 F.2d 169· 3d Cir.· 1969-01-07 ·cited 14×
  The court held that presenting contentions to a state's highest court exhausts available state remedies for federal habeas corpus purposes. The order denying the petition was vacated and remanded for a hearing on the merits.
• Nance v. Baker
  400 F.2d 864· 10th Cir.· 1968-09-16 ·cited 14×
  The court affirmed the denial of the federal writ of habeas corpus, finding no violation of constitutional rights and sufficient evidence for conviction.
• Worley v. Swenson
  386 F.2d 186· 8th Cir.· 1967-11-22 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the district court should stay proceedings pending a renewed application for relief under the new Missouri Supreme Court Rule 27.26, as the appellant may not have fully exhausted state remedies.
• United States ex rel. Carl E. DeFLUMER, Jr. v. Mancusi
  380 F.2d 1018· 2d Cir.· 1967-07-26 ·cited 14×
  The court held that a petitioner must exhaust state remedies for all constitutional claims raised in a habeas corpus petition, even if related.
• Castro v. Klinger
  373 F.2d 847· 9th Cir.· 1967-02-24 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the district court erred in denying the habeas corpus petition for failure to exhaust state remedies, as the California Supreme Court's denial of a prior petition, without explanation, did not preclude federal review.
• Brooks Lee Anderson v. Wilburn C. Johnson
  371 F.2d 84· 6th Cir.· 1966-12-22 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the denial of counsel before Escobedo v. Illinois is not grounds for reversal due to non-retroactivity, and that the evidence did not establish systematic exclusion of Negroes from juries.
• Burns Trusty, Jr. v. The State OF Okla. & Ray Page
  360 F.2d 173· 10th Cir.· 1966-05-05 ·cited 14×
  A federal court need not hold an evidentiary hearing on a habeas corpus petition if the state court provided a full and fair evidentiary hearing and reliably found the relevant facts.
• Delphos B. Burns v. Crouse
  353 F.2d 489· 10th Cir.· 1965-11-26 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the petitioner was not given a fair opportunity to present evidence regarding the prosecution's knowing use of perjured testimony.
• Dillon v. Peters
  341 F.2d 337· 10th Cir.· 1965-02-13 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the Mapp v. Ohio exclusionary rule applies to convictions that were not final at the time Mapp was decided, and that failure to object to illegally obtained evidence does not constitute a waiver of rights in habeas corpus proceedings.
• United States ex rel. Joseph Calhoun v. Pate
  341 F.2d 885· 7th Cir.· 1965-02-03 ·cited 14×
  The court held that a federal district court erred in granting summary judgment on a habeas corpus petition when the relator had not exhausted available state remedies.
• Oyler v. Taylor
  338 F.2d 260· 10th Cir.· 1964-11-17 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the petitioner was not denied his constitutional right to appeal, as he failed to comply with the state's procedural rules for indigent appeals. The court also found no merit in claims regarding a coerced confession or perjured testimony.
• Midgett v. Warden, Md. State Penitentiary
  329 F.2d 185· 4th Cir.· 1964-02-25 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in refusing a plenary hearing and abstaining pending state court review of newly raised claims.
• United States ex rel. Samuel Tito Williams v. FAY
  323 F.2d 65· 2d Cir.· 1963-10-04 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the undisputed facts revealed that the relator's confessions were the product of coercion as a matter of law, violating his due process rights.
• Mahurin v. Nash
  321 F.2d 662· 8th Cir.· 1963-09-03 ·cited 14×
  Federal courts are not required to entertain a habeas corpus application until the petitioner has exhausted available state post-conviction remedies under Rule 27.26.
• United States ex rel. Edgar Smith v. State OF NEW Jersey & the Principal Keeper of the State Prison at Trenton
  322 F.2d 810· 3d Cir.· 1963-07-24 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the confession was obtained in violation of due process rights due to coercive interrogation tactics.
• United States ex rel. Franklin LaNEAR v. Hon. J. Edwin LaVALLEE
  306 F.2d 417· 2d Cir.· 1962-07-12 ·cited 14×
  A federal court may entertain a habeas corpus petition challenging a state conviction based on an allegedly unconstitutional prior conviction from another state, even if the petitioner has not exhausted remedies in the foreign state.
• United States ex rel. Charles Noia v. FAY
  300 F.2d 345· 2d Cir.· 1962-02-07 ·cited 14×
  The court held that Noia did not waive his constitutional right against conviction based on a coerced confession, and that his failure to appeal did not preclude federal habeas corpus relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 because state remedies were ineffective.
• Wooten v. Bomar
  267 F.2d 900· 6th Cir.· 1959-06-17 ·cited 14×
  The court held that a federal court may not grant habeas corpus relief to a state prisoner who has not exhausted available state remedies, including state habeas corpus proceedings.
• Mason McCOY v. Tucker
  259 F.2d 714· 4th Cir.· 1958-10-06 ·cited 14×
  The Court of Appeals dismissed the appeal because the District Court properly denied the petition for a writ of habeas corpus for failure to exhaust state remedies and lack of merit, and no certificate of probable cause was issued.
• United States ex rel. Louis Cuomo v. FAY
  257 F.2d 438· 2d Cir.· 1958-07-11 ·cited 14×
  The relator has not exhausted his state remedies as required by 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254, as he failed to properly present his federal claim to the state courts through an available and appropriate procedure.
• United States ex rel. George Alvarez v. Murphy
  246 F.2d 871· 2d Cir.· 1957-07-09 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the petitioner made a sufficient showing that his confession was coerced, entitling him to a hearing on his habeas corpus petition.
• Application of John Henry Tune
  230 F.2d 883· 3d Cir.· 1956-03-06 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the denial of pre-trial inspection of a confession did not violate due process where no prejudice was shown, and that a state's procedure allowing the trial judge, rather than the jury, to determine the voluntariness of a confession is constitutionally permiss
• United States ex rel. Roger Touhy v. Ragen
  224 F.2d 611· 7th Cir.· 1955-07-20 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the relator had not sufficiently exhausted his state court remedies regarding his conviction for aiding an escape, and therefore the district court erred in discharging him.
• Robbins v. Green
  218 F.2d 192· 1st Cir.· 1954-12-21 ·cited 14×
  The federal court correctly denied the warden's motion to dismiss the habeas corpus petition, as the prisoner had exhausted state remedies due to his inability to afford an appeal.
• ALL Am. Airways, Inc. v. Vill. of Cedar-Hurst
  201 F.2d 273· 2d Cir.· 1953-01-07 ·cited 14×
  The court held that there is a substantial question regarding the ordinance's validity against federal supremacy, and thus the injunction against its enforcement should be continued pending trial.
• United States ex rel. Meiner v. Ragen
  199 F.2d 798· 7th Cir.· 1952-11-26 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the petitioner's confinement did not violate due process, and the district court correctly denied the writ of habeas corpus.
• United States ex rel. Daverse v. Hohn
  198 F.2d 934· 3d Cir.· 1952-09-17 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the district court did not err in dismissing the habeas corpus petition, as the petitioner failed to establish a denial of constitutional rights regarding juror bias, pre-trial psychiatric examination, or jury communications.
• Harris v. Ellis
  194 F.2d 604· 5th Cir.· 1952-02-15 ·cited 14×
  The appeal is dismissed for want of jurisdiction because a certificate of probable cause was not presented, which is a prerequisite for appeals in habeas corpus proceedings arising from state court detentions.
• United States ex rel. Rooney v. Ragen
  158 F.2d 346· 7th Cir.· 1946-11-20 ·cited 14×
  A federal court has jurisdiction to hear a habeas corpus petition alleging a due process violation based on knowing use of perjured testimony, even if state remedies appear time-barred, provided the petitioner has exhausted available state remedies.
• United States ex rel. Carter v. Ragen
  153 F.2d 902· 7th Cir.· 1946-02-25 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the petitioner was lawfully in custody and affirmed the lower court's decision.
• Morton v. Henderson
  123 F.2d 48· 5th Cir.· 1941-10-21 ·cited 14×
  The federal court should not intervene by habeas corpus when state remedies have not been exhausted for all issues.
• Kramer v. State of Nev.
  122 F.2d 417· 9th Cir.· 1941-09-09 ·cited 14×
• Sierra Lake Reserve v. The City OF Rocklin
  938 F.2d 951· 9th Cir.· 1991-07-09 ·cited 13×
• Davis v. Lansing
  851 F.2d 72· 2d Cir.· 1988-06-30 ·cited 13×
  The court held that federal courts should abstain from interfering with pending state criminal prosecutions absent a showing of great and immediate irreparable harm or prosecutorial bad faith.
• Turner v. Compoy
  827 F.2d 526· 9th Cir.· 1987-09-03 ·cited 13×
  A state prisoner is presumed to have exhausted state remedies when the state's highest court denies a hearing without citation or comment, even if the state court has expressed a preference for habeas corpus review of certain claims.
• Georgalis v. Dist. Attorney Donnie Dixon
  776 F.2d 261· 11th Cir.· 1985-11-13 ·cited 13×
  A federal court will not grant habeas corpus relief unless the petitioner has exhausted all available state remedies.
• Carter v. Procunier
  755 F.2d 1126· 5th Cir.· 1985-03-22 ·cited 13×
  The court held that the petitioner was 'in custody' for habeas corpus purposes and that his claim was not moot, as collateral consequences could still arise from the challenged conviction.
• Kravitz v. Commonwealth OF Pa.
  546 F.2d 1100· 3d Cir.· 1977-02-23 ·cited 13×
  The court held that the habeas corpus petition should not have been dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, and the declaratory judgment action was properly dismissed because the named defendants could not provide the requested relief.
• United States ex rel. Joel Smith v. Montanye
  505 F.2d 1355· 2d Cir.· 1974-11-08 ·cited 13×
  The court held that the district court erred in granting the writ of habeas corpus because the petitioner failed to exhaust available state judicial remedies and because the grounds alleged did not properly raise a constitutional issue.
• Anderson v. Beto
  469 F.2d 1076· 5th Cir.· 1972-11-27 ·cited 13×
  The district court failed to follow the appellate court's mandate to determine if state remedies were exhausted before ordering the state to hold an evidentiary hearing.
• United States ex rel. James P. Carafas v. LaVALLEE
  334 F.2d 331· 2d Cir.· 1964-06-22 ·cited 13×
  The court held that a petitioner's failure to object to evidence at trial does not preclude federal habeas corpus relief if the evidence was admissible under the law at the time of trial and the state courts have passed on the merits of the constitutional claim.
• Duffy v. Wells
  201 F.2d 503· 9th Cir.· 1952-12-31 ·cited 13×
  The court held that the district court had jurisdiction to hear the habeas corpus petition after state remedies were exhausted, but erred in finding the death sentence unconstitutional.
• Boardman v. Estelle
  957 F.2d 1523· 9th Cir.· 1992-01-09 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the state waived its Teague defense by failing to raise it timely, and therefore the court would not entertain the state's argument that the prior ruling created a new rule on habeas corpus.