Exhaustion Of State Remedies

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

• Villas of Lake Jackson, Ltd. v. Leon Cnty.
  796 F. Supp. 1477· N.D. Fla.· 1992-06-15 ·cited 8×
  The court held that claims alleging the denial of all economically viable use of land are not ripe until the landowner seeks approval for development under current regulations and is denied. Claims for just compensation are also not ripe until state remedies are exhausted.
• Curto v. City OF Harper Woods
  954 F.2d 1237· 6th Cir.· 1992-01-28 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court erred in granting summary judgment on the plaintiff's claim that the ordinance was an unreasonable means of advancing a legitimate governmental interest, as the record was insufficient to determine if the 'three cars per bay' limit was arbit
• Jackson v. Johnson
  950 F.2d 263· 5th Cir.· 1992-01-09 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court erred in dismissing the civil rights lawsuit as time-barred without fully developing the factual record regarding Texas tolling doctrines.
• Paris Hoyt Carriger v. Lewis
  948 F.2d 588· 9th Cir.· 1991-11-04 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court's orders granting summary judgment and refusing to vacate it are affirmed, while its subsequent Rule 60(b) orders are vacated for want of jurisdiction, and the second habeas petition is dismissed.
• Clark v. Ricketts
  942 F.2d 567· 9th Cir.· 1991-08-09 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the appellant's Sixth Amendment right of confrontation was not violated by the concealment of a witness's identity and address, and that his Fifth and Sixth Amendment claims regarding a presentence interview were either frivolous or procedurally barred. The co
• Clark v. Ricketts
  958 F.2d 851· 8th Cir.· 1991-08-09 ·cited 8×
  The court affirmed the denial of the habeas corpus petition, holding that the Sixth Amendment right of confrontation was not violated by concealing a witness's identity when necessary for safety, and that the state death penalty statute and sentencing procedures were constitution
• Thompson v. Mo. Bd. OF Parole & United States Attorney
  929 F.2d 396· 8th Cir.· 1991-03-29 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the prisoner is entitled to parole credit for the two years he served in prison due to the state's vindictive denial of parole, and thus must receive parole discharge consideration.
• Burgin v. Broglin
  900 F.2d 990· 7th Cir.· 1990-04-10 ·cited 8×
  The majority found a waiver of the alleged undisclosed plea agreement issue, barring further litigation. The dissenting judge disagrees with this conclusion.
• Shook v. Clarke
  894 F.2d 1496· 8th Cir.· 1990-02-07 ·cited 8×
  The court held that a federal habeas petition containing both exhausted and unexhausted claims must be dismissed, but the dismissal should be without prejudice.
• Buckley v. A.L. Lockhart
  892 F.2d 715· 8th Cir.· 1989-12-20 ·cited 8×
  The court held that a federal habeas corpus petitioner's claims are procedurally barred if not fairly presented to the state courts, and that escape from custody forfeits the right to appeal, thus precluding an ineffective assistance of counsel claim based on failure to appeal.
• Monachelli v. Warden, SCI Graterford & the Attorney Gen. of the Commonwealth of Pa. & the Dist. Attorney of Bucks Cnty.
  884 F.2d 749· 3d Cir.· 1989-09-11 ·cited 8×
  The admission of a non-testifying co-defendant's out-of-court statements, even with a limiting instruction, violates the other defendant's Sixth Amendment right to confrontation unless the error is harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.
• Barks v. Armontrout
  872 F.2d 237· 8th Cir.· 1989-06-29 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the state courts would not entertain the petitioner's successive post-conviction relief motion under Rule 29.15, making further attempts at state redress futile.
• Sprouse v. Babcock
  870 F.2d 450· 8th Cir.· 1989-03-20 ·cited 8×
  The filing of a disciplinary charge against a prisoner, even if otherwise not actionable, is actionable under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 if done in retaliation for the prisoner filing a grievance.
• Smith v. Springer
  859 F.2d 31· 7th Cir.· 1988-08-31 ·cited 8×
  A federal court § 1983 lawsuit seeking monetary damages for fabricated evidence is not a collateral attack on a state court conviction, even if the plaintiff was previously incarcerated.
• Rosario Joseph Dispensa v. Lynaugh
  847 F.2d 211· 5th Cir.· 1988-06-16 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the identification procedure was unnecessarily suggestive and unreliable, violating due process, and affirmed the district court's grant of habeas corpus relief.
• Reverend Nathaniel T. Grady v. LeFEVRE
  846 F.2d 862· 2d Cir.· 1988-05-13 ·cited 8×
  A federal court must dismiss a habeas corpus petition containing both unexhausted and exhausted claims, requiring the petitioner to present all claims to the state courts first.
• Wise v. Warden, Maryland Penitentiary
  839 F.2d 1030· 4th Cir.· 1988-02-23 ·cited 8×
  The court held that a federal habeas petitioner must exhaust state remedies, and new evidence presented in federal court may require the state courts to re-evaluate the claim's procedural posture and merits.
• Casale v. Fair
  833 F.2d 386· 1st Cir.· 1987-11-18 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to sustain the convictions, that certain claims were waived due to failure to raise them on direct appeal, that other claims were unexhausted, and that the appellants received effective assistance of counsel.
• Meadows v. Manfred G. Holland
  831 F.2d 493· 4th Cir.· 1987-10-16 ·cited 8×
  The majority decision improperly overruled prior panel precedent (Adkins) by disregarding established principles of federal collateral review and habeas corpus jurisprudence.
• United States v. Gaylor
  828 F.2d 253· 4th Cir.· 1987-09-16 ·cited 8×
  The court held that a federal inmate seeking to vacate an enhanced sentence under the Dangerous Special Offender statute, based on a challenge to a prior state conviction, must first exhaust available state remedies.
• Gornick v. Greer
  819 F.2d 160· 7th Cir.· 1987-05-13 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the petitioner has not exhausted his state court remedies because claims of ineffective assistance of counsel, particularly those involving facts outside the trial record, can still be raised in Illinois post-conviction proceedings.
• Jaxie LEE v. Sheriff Bill Hutson & Cobb Cnty.
  810 F.2d 1030· 11th Cir.· 1987-02-19 ·cited 8×
  The court held that alleged procedural errors in an administrative hearing, where state remedies exist, do not constitute a federal due process violation. However, a conclusory equal protection claim may survive dismissal.
• Franklin v. Rose
  811 F.2d 322· 6th Cir.· 1987-02-13 ·cited 8×
  A habeas petitioner must fairly present the substance of a federal claim, including the legal theory, to the state courts to satisfy the exhaustion requirement.
• Beachem v. Attorney General OF Missouri
  808 F.2d 1303· 8th Cir.· 1987-01-13 ·cited 8×
  The court held that a guilty plea waives independent claims of constitutional violations and extradition defects, and that a minor technical error in lodging a detainer does not invalidate it.
• Feeney v. Auger
  808 F.2d 1279· 8th Cir.· 1986-12-31 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court correctly treated the suit as a habeas corpus petition but erred in dismissing it; the case should be dismissed without prejudice to allow pursuit of state remedies.
• Darrel Ray Leonard and Johnny A. Casselbury v. L.T. Hammond, Jr.
  804 F.2d 838· 4th Cir.· 1986-11-10 ·cited 8×
  A federal court must dismiss a habeas corpus petition if the petitioner has not first exhausted state remedies, even if the petitioner has been released from custody.
• Piercy v. Black
  801 F.2d 1075· 8th Cir.· 1986-10-01 ·cited 8×
  The court held that a state prisoner's claim that one state's sentences should run concurrently with another state's sentences does not implicate federal constitutional rights and is not grounds for federal habeas corpus relief.
• Boston Env't Sanitation Inspectors Ass'n & John Curry v. City OF Boston
  794 F.2d 12· 1st Cir.· 1986-06-26 ·cited 8×
  The court held that appellants' federal claims were properly dismissed because they failed to avail themselves of adequate state remedies and because mere violations of state statutes or contracts do not constitute a deprivation of due process under § 1983.
• Gibson v. Klevenhagen
  777 F.2d 1056· 5th Cir.· 1985-12-10 ·cited 8×
  The court held that a guilty plea does not waive a speedy trial claim if state law permits appeal of pre-trial motions after a plea. The district court erred in dismissing the habeas petition.
• Lloyd v. Page
  474 So. 2d 865· Fla. 1st DCA· 1985-08-14 ·cited 8×
  Winston Lloyd, proceeding pro se, appealed a trial court's dismissal of his § 1983 civil rights action against the Nassau County Property Appraiser for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. The Florida District Court of Appeal reversed, holding that state courts have concurrent ju
• Elmore v. Foltz
  768 F.2d 773· 6th Cir.· 1985-07-26 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the destruction of potentially exculpatory tapes did not violate due process under the Trombetta standard because there was no bad faith, the tapes were unlikely to be exculpatory, and comparable impeachment evidence was available.
• Tsirizotakis v. LeFEVRE
  736 F.2d 57· 2d Cir.· 1984-06-11 ·cited 8×
  The court affirmed the denial of the habeas petition, finding that the petitioner procedurally defaulted on his claims and that his counsel's assistance did not constitute cause for the default or an independent constitutional violation.
• Prado McGEE, Jr. v. W.J. Estelle, Jr.
  732 F.2d 447· 5th Cir.· 1984-05-21 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the use of a constitutionally invalid prior conviction for sentence enhancement, when that conviction was specifically alleged in the indictment, cannot be considered harmless error, even if other valid convictions exist. The court also found that the district
• Tyler v. Wyrick
  730 F.2d 1209· 8th Cir.· 1984-04-02 ·cited 8×
  The court held that a state prisoner's federal habeas petition must be dismissed if it contains any unexhausted claims, even if other claims have been exhausted.
• Parker v. Rose
  728 F.2d 392· 6th Cir.· 1984-03-02 ·cited 8×
  The Sixth Circuit held that the petitioner had not exhausted his state remedies and therefore his federal habeas corpus petition could not be considered on the merits.
• Cole v. Hunter
  726 F.2d 434· 8th Cir.· 1984-02-07 ·cited 8×
  The court affirmed the denial of the habeas corpus petition, finding no violation of the Sixth Amendment right to confrontation and declining to reach the merits of the Fifth Amendment claim due to failure to exhaust state remedies.
• Allbee v. Hoyt C. Cupp
  716 F.2d 635· 9th Cir.· 1983-09-20 ·cited 8×
  The court held that a federal court should not grant a writ of habeas corpus unless the petitioner has exhausted all available state remedies for all claims, including sentencing claims that have been clarified by recent state court decisions.
• Hindman v. Wyrick
  702 F.2d 148· 8th Cir.· 1983-03-16 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the petitioner was not prejudiced by his trial counsel's failure to call a specific witness, and thus was not denied effective assistance of counsel.
• Vest v. Sterling Bossard
  700 F.2d 600· 10th Cir.· 1983-02-18 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the statute of limitations should be tolled because the plaintiff could not have discovered the cause of action due to a conspiracy and cover-up by the defendants. The plaintiff's suspicions were insufficient to start the limitations period.
• Sudds v. Maggio
  696 F.2d 415· 5th Cir.· 1983-01-27 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the denial of a challenge for cause, refusal to instruct on intoxication, and use of prior convictions for sentence enhancement do not provide grounds for habeas corpus relief.
• Paul v. Henderson
  698 F.2d 589· 2d Cir.· 1983-01-18 ·cited 8×
  The court held that a defendant waives his double jeopardy claim if he fails to raise it before the second trial, and that a retrial after a mistrial does not violate the Double Jeopardy Clause.
• Thad Douglas Lowe v. Duckworth
  663 F.2d 42· 7th Cir.· 1981-11-09 ·cited 8×
  The court held that while the district court's dismissal for failure to exhaust was erroneous due to state court delay, the federal petition became moot when the state court granted a new trial.
• Atencio v. Bd. OF Educ. OF Penasco Indep. Sch. Dist. NO. 4
  658 F.2d 774· 10th Cir.· 1981-09-08 ·cited 8×
  A breach of state procedural requirements, even if creating a property interest, does not automatically constitute a federal constitutional violation under the Due Process Clause if adequate state remedies exist.
• Briggs v. Raines
  652 F.2d 862· 9th Cir.· 1981-08-07 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the petitioner had exhausted state remedies and that an evidentiary hearing is required to determine if the victim's FBI rap sheet contained favorable and material evidence that would have supported the petitioner's self-defense claim.
• Franklin v. Webb
  653 F.2d 362· 8th Cir.· 1981-07-16 ·cited 8×
  The court held that while a prisoner must exhaust state remedies for claims challenging the fact or duration of confinement, a claim for damages under section 1983 is not subject to the same exhaustion requirement and may be subject to a statute of limitations issue.
• Hillery Preston v. Blackburn
  638 F.2d 788· 5th Cir.· 1981-03-02 ·cited 8×
  The court held that a federal habeas corpus petition must be dismissed if it contains any unexhausted claims, even if other claims have been exhausted.
• Clonce v. Presley
  640 F.2d 271· 10th Cir.· 1981-02-06 ·cited 8×
  The court held that while the petitioner was in state custody for habeas corpus purposes, his petition was properly dismissed for failure to exhaust state remedies.
• Doescher v. Estelle
  616 F.2d 205· 5th Cir.· 1980-05-01 ·cited 8×
  The court held that while the search warrant claim was not barred by Stone v. Powell due to lack of a full and fair hearing, it must first be exhausted in state court. Other claims were denied.
• Neville v. Cavanagh
  611 F.2d 673· 7th Cir.· 1979-12-21 ·cited 8×
  The dissent argues that federal courts should not be reluctant to grant pre-trial habeas relief to the point of extinguishing claims, especially when state courts have already definitively ruled on the merits.
• Collins v. Perini
  594 F.2d 592· 6th Cir.· 1979-04-02 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court correctly denied the petition for a writ of habeas corpus, affirming the denial of the appellant's claims.