Exhaustion Of State Remedies

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

• Earle R. Robinson v. Berman
  594 F.2d 1· 1st Cir.· 1979-03-23 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the petitioner had sufficient notice that his conduct was illegal, as prior judicial decisions had clarified the meaning of 'unnatural sexual intercourse' in related statutes, thus the statute was not unconstitutionally vague as applied to him.
• Harkins v. Wyrick
  589 F.2d 387· 8th Cir.· 1979-01-10 ·cited 8×
  The court held that federal constitutional law does not require a state to grant credit for time spent in federal custody for reasons unrelated to the state conviction, even if the state prisoner was mentally incompetent.
• Carr v. State OF Ala.
  586 F.2d 462· 5th Cir.· 1978-12-15 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court erred in finding the jury deliberation claim unexhausted, but correctly found the lineup and self-incrimination claims to be without merit.
• Shane v. State OF Iowa
  581 F.2d 727· 8th Cir.· 1978-08-22 ·cited 8×
  The court affirmed the dismissal of the habeas corpus petition, finding the Fourth Amendment claim precluded and the identification issue unexhausted in state courts.
• Girard v. Goins
  575 F.2d 160· 8th Cir.· 1978-04-13 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the petitioners did not waive their right to a jury trial and had exhausted their state remedies, and that the fines imposed for criminal contempt constituted a serious offense, thus violating their constitutional right to a jury trial.
• Douglas v. Muncy
  570 F.2d 499· 4th Cir.· 1978-01-20 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the prisoner failed to exhaust state remedies for his habeas corpus petition and that prison officials were entitled to qualified immunity on the § 1983 claims for denial of legal access.
• People of the United States ex rel. John J. Rooney v. Housewright
  568 F.2d 516· 7th Cir.· 1977-12-05 ·cited 8×
  The dissenting judge holds that the defendant was deprived of a fair trial due to the exclusion of evidence regarding the deceased's reputation for violence and the improper emphasis on the defendant's silence to police.
• Cronnon v. State OF Ala.
  557 F.2d 472· 5th Cir.· 1977-08-12 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the petitioner had exhausted his state remedies for all claims raised in his habeas petition. The district court erred in refusing to adjudicate six of the seven claims on the merits.
• Wall v. Superintendent, Va. State Penitentiary
  553 F.2d 359· 4th Cir.· 1977-04-21 ·cited 8×
  The court held that allowing jurors who sat on a prior trial of a co-defendant, where they heard prejudicial evidence not admissible in the defendant's trial, violates the defendant's due process rights to an impartial jury and confrontation of witnesses.
• Don v. Stinson
  545 F.2d 485· 5th Cir.· 1977-01-14 ·cited 8×
• Franklin v. French Conway
  546 F.2d 579· 4th Cir.· 1976-12-30 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the prisoner must exhaust state remedies before a federal court considers the facial validity of the statute under recent Supreme Court precedent.
• ST. Pierre v. Helgemoe
  545 F.2d 1306· 1st Cir.· 1976-12-16 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the petitioner's claim, even if based on a retroactive change in law, must first be presented to state courts for exhaustion of remedies.
• United States ex rel. Ronald Burbank v. Warden, Ill. State Penitentiary
  535 F.2d 361· 7th Cir.· 1976-05-05 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the arresting officers had probable cause to arrest the petitioner based on witness descriptions and the arresting officer's personal knowledge of the neighborhood and its inhabitants. The court also held that the state trial court adequately determined the vo
• Cain v. State OF Mo.
  518 F.2d 1180· 8th Cir.· 1975-06-26 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court erred by dismissing the habeas petition without inquiring whether the petitioner deliberately bypassed state remedies.
• United States ex rel. Frederick Charles Stewart v. Lowell D. Hewitt
  517 F.2d 993· 3d Cir.· 1975-06-10 ·cited 8×
  A mistrial declared sua sponte due to the potential for jury bias, even without explicit proof of prejudice, is permissible under the 'manifest necessity' standard if it serves the ends of public justice.
• Kelley v. Swenson
  510 F.2d 264· 8th Cir.· 1975-01-28 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court properly denied the habeas corpus petition because the arresting officers had probable cause to arrest the petitioner. The court also held that the district court did not err in refusing to admit the entire state trial transcript into eviden
• Colvin v. Estelle
  506 F.2d 747· 5th Cir.· 1975-01-15 ·cited 8×
  A new penal code with different sentencing does not entitle a prisoner to release if a saving clause preserves prior convictions and sentences.
• United States ex rel. John B. Adams v. Bensinger
  507 F.2d 390· 7th Cir.· 1974-12-10 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the petitioner did not waive his claim of an involuntary confession and that the confession was indeed involuntary due to the totality of the circumstances.
• Davis v. Pitchess
  518 F.2d 141· 9th Cir.· 1974-12-09 ·cited 8×
• Pickens v. The State OF Tex.
  497 F.2d 981· 5th Cir.· 1974-07-19 ·cited 8×
  The court held that revoking probation based on speech protected by the First Amendment constitutes an abuse of discretion.
• Reynolds v. Lockhart
  497 F.2d 314· 8th Cir.· 1974-05-17 ·cited 8×
  The court held that while the petitioner's claim regarding denial of counsel on appeal may have merit, he failed to exhaust state remedies, and thus the petition for habeas corpus is denied.
• Fate Thomas v. Beasley
  491 F.2d 507· 6th Cir.· 1974-02-05 ·cited 8×
  The court held that jeopardy attached at the first trial, and the declaration of a mistrial over the defendant's objection without manifest necessity bars retrial.
• Sammie L. Nelson v. Moriarty
  484 F.2d 1034· 1st Cir.· 1973-09-20 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the petitioner had not exhausted his state remedies and therefore was not entitled to federal habeas corpus relief.
• Morgan v. Wofford
  472 F.2d 822· 5th Cir.· 1973-01-29 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court should determine if the appellant disputed the restitution amount and, if so, grant relief conditioned on the state providing due process.
• Dudley Lewis LEE v. Louie L. Wainwright
  468 F.2d 809· 5th Cir.· 1972-10-25 ·cited 8×
  Failure to petition the Florida Supreme Court for certiorari after denial of state post-conviction relief does not bar federal habeas corpus relief for failure to exhaust state remedies.
• United States ex rel. Clyde Curtis v. Warden OF Green Haven Prison
  463 F.2d 84· 2d Cir.· 1972-06-21 ·cited 8×
  The court affirmed the denial of habeas corpus, finding no constitutional error in the indictment or identification procedures, and that any prejudice from testimony was cured.
• Pruett v. The State OF Tex.
  468 F.2d 51· 5th Cir.· 1972-06-12 ·cited 8×
• Goodspeed v. Beto
  460 F.2d 398· 5th Cir.· 1972-05-16 ·cited 8×
  The court held that most of the petitioner's claims were without merit or previously decided, but remanded for an evidentiary hearing on the issue of being tried in prison garb.
• Armstrong v. Cardwell
  457 F.2d 34· 6th Cir.· 1972-03-20 ·cited 8×
  The court held that while claims regarding prison treatment are generally cognizable in habeas corpus, the petitioner's specific claim of denial of access to courts was moot and other claims lacked merit, thus affirming the denial of the writ.
• Carter v. Duggan
  455 F.2d 1156· 5th Cir.· 1972-02-29 ·cited 8×
  State judges are immune from suit for damages for judicial actions, and a federal court should not compel state judges to act without prior exhaustion of state remedies.
• Braden v. 30TH Jud. Cir. Court OF the Commonwealth OF Ky.
  454 F.2d 145· 6th Cir.· 1972-01-18 ·cited 8×
  A federal district court lacks jurisdiction to issue a writ of habeas corpus for a petitioner not physically present within its territorial limits.
• Hill v. Warden Bay H. Page & The State of Okla.
  454 F.2d 679· 10th Cir.· 1971-12-28 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the trial courts correctly denied relief to both petitioners, affirming their decisions.
• Chauncey v. Second Jud. Dist. Court
  453 F.2d 389· 9th Cir.· 1971-12-23 ·cited 8×
• McGINNIS v. United States ex rel. Milton Pollack
  452 F.2d 833· 2d Cir.· 1971-12-02 ·cited 8×
  The state must credit time spent in custody on a new charge against a prior sentence when the defendant could not make bail on the new charge due to indigence, even if the statute does not explicitly allow it.
• Elvert Chisley v. Richland Parish Sch. Bd.
  448 F.2d 1251· 5th Cir.· 1971-09-27 ·cited 8×
  The court held that exhaustion of state remedies is not a prerequisite for filing a claim under 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983.
• Mobley v. Lamont Smith
  443 F.2d 846· 5th Cir.· 1971-06-15 ·cited 8×
  The denial of relief on the confession and reopening grounds was correct, and other claims not adequately adjudicated in state courts must be presented there first.
• Ferrara v. State OF La.
  443 F.2d 344· 5th Cir.· 1971-05-17 ·cited 8×
  The court held that a stay order pending exhaustion of state remedies is not an appealable order under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(a)(1) because it does not grant or deny an injunction.
• Hall v. Louie L. Wainwright
  441 F.2d 391· 5th Cir.· 1971-04-09 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the petitioner was denied his right to appeal, but the federal court should not have addressed the ineffective counsel claim without prior state court consideration.
• Ector v. Smith
  438 F.2d 975· 5th Cir.· 1971-02-12 ·cited 8×
• Jones v. Sheriff Bill Decker
  436 F.2d 954· 5th Cir.· 1970-12-30 ·cited 8×
  The court held that a civil rights action is a supplemental remedy and does not require exhaustion of state remedies, but a habeas corpus petition does.
• Dennis v. Henderson
  435 F.2d 1288· 5th Cir.· 1970-12-18 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court's denial of the petition for habeas corpus was not erroneous, affirming the lower court's decision.
• Malone v. Louie L. Wainwright
  433 F.2d 927· 5th Cir.· 1970-11-13 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court erred in not considering the denial of counsel issue and in failing to make operative findings of fact regarding the arrest.
• Thomas v. Decker
  434 F.2d 1033· 5th Cir.· 1970-10-12 ·cited 8×
  A federal court may consider a habeas corpus petition on its merits if the petitioner has already raised the issues on direct appeal to the highest state court, even if state habeas relief has not been sought.
• Seybold v. Cady
  431 F.2d 683· 7th Cir.· 1970-08-20 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court properly denied the habeas corpus petitions for failure to exhaust state remedies, as the petitioner had not presented all his claims to the Wisconsin courts.
• United States ex rel. John Amos Jennings v. State of Pa.
  429 F.2d 522· 3d Cir.· 1970-07-24 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court erred in dismissing the habeas corpus petition for lack of jurisdiction, as the prisoner's custodian could have been named as respondent.
• McArthur Harris v. State OF Ala.
  429 F.2d 1236· 5th Cir.· 1970-07-23 ·cited 8×
  The court held that a prisoner is not required to appeal a denial of coram nobis relief in state court to exhaust state remedies for federal habeas corpus.
• Cleophus Young v. State OF Ala.
  427 F.2d 177· 5th Cir.· 1970-05-12 ·cited 8×
  A federal habeas corpus petitioner who has presented a claim to the highest state court has exhausted state remedies, even if the claim was raised on direct appeal rather than in a collateral proceeding.
• Stanford Yates v. Wingo
  425 F.2d 1167· 6th Cir.· 1970-05-05 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the petitioner was entitled to an evidentiary hearing on his habeas corpus petition.
• United States ex rel. Salvador Agron v. Ross E. Herold, M.D.
  426 F.2d 125· 2d Cir.· 1970-04-30 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the appellant waived his claim of prejudicial pre-trial publicity by deliberately failing to raise it at trial and on appeal.
• Cindle v. Page
  424 F.2d 509· 10th Cir.· 1970-04-22 ·cited 8×
  The federal court must independently assess constitutional claims of state prisoners, even if state courts have ruled on them.