Exhaustion Of State Remedies

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

• Bergen McNEELEY v. Arvon Arave
  842 F.2d 230· 9th Cir.· 1988-03-17 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the appellant failed to exhaust state remedies by not petitioning the Idaho Supreme Court for review, and the district court did not abuse its discretion in failing to certify the issue.
• Riley Bradford White v. Meachum
  838 F.2d 1137· 10th Cir.· 1988-02-05 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the prisoner must exhaust state remedies by seeking review in the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals before filing a federal habeas corpus petition.
• Plunkett v. Johnson
  828 F.2d 954· 2d Cir.· 1987-09-15 ·cited 6×
  The court held that Granberry v. Greer does not require review of unexhausted habeas corpus claims absent exceptional circumstances of peculiar urgency.
• McCORQUODALE v. Kemp
  832 F.2d 543· 11th Cir.· 1987-09-08 ·cited 6×
  The district court did not err in dismissing the jury instruction claim as an abuse of the writ, and therefore the judgment denying relief is affirmed.
• Wasko v. Vasquez
  820 F.2d 1090· 9th Cir.· 1987-06-29 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the Department of Corrections incorrectly altered Wasko's sentence for escape from local custody, and the correct sentence length should be eight months as originally imposed by the sentencing court.
• Davis v. Wainwright
  644 F. Supp. 269· M.D. Fla.· 1986-09-23 ·cited 6×
  The court held that a pattern of deliberate delay in filing habeas corpus petitions, particularly when timed to occur shortly before a scheduled execution, constitutes an abuse of the writ, justifying denial of the petition and stay requests.
• Hughes v. Stafford
  780 F.2d 1580· 11th Cir.· 1986-01-30 ·cited 6×
  The district court correctly dismissed the federal habeas corpus petition for failure to exhaust state remedies, as the petitioner bypassed an available state appellate procedure.
• Harris v. Scully
  779 F.2d 875· 2d Cir.· 1985-12-19 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in refusing to instruct the jury on justification as it relates to defense of third parties, nor in refusing to instruct on second degree manslaughter.
• Kuntzelman v. Black
  774 F.2d 291· 8th Cir.· 1985-10-01 ·cited 6×
  The admission of allegedly inflammatory photographs at trial was not so prejudicial as to deny the defendant due process and a fair trial.
• Willis v. Lansome Newsome
  771 F.2d 1445· 11th Cir.· 1985-09-24 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying the motion for exhumation or the petition for writ of habeas corpus, as the appellant's ineffective assistance of counsel claims were based on reasonable tactical decisions by his attorneys.
• Duffy v. Foltz
  772 F.2d 1271· 6th Cir.· 1985-09-13 ·cited 6×
  The majority's holding that the prosecution must disprove the affirmative defense of insanity as a matter of constitutional law is inconsistent with Supreme Court precedent.
• Doyle J. Williams v. Wyrick
  763 F.2d 363· 8th Cir.· 1985-06-06 ·cited 6×
  The court held that motions to recall the mandate are not an adequate or appropriate means of exhausting state remedies for all claims in a federal habeas petition.
• Powell v. Wyrick
  744 F.2d 632· 8th Cir.· 1984-09-26 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the petitioner knowingly and intelligently waived his right to counsel, and there was no constitutional infirmity in his conviction.
• Thompson v. Housewright
  741 F.2d 213· 8th Cir.· 1984-08-23 ·cited 6×
  The court held that a state prisoner is entitled to a transcript of his entire state trial to support his claim of ineffective assistance of counsel, even if the claim was not perfectly articulated in state court.
• Pringle v. Court OF Common Pleas
  744 F.2d 297· 3d Cir.· 1984-07-05 ·cited 6×
  A federal court has jurisdiction to hear a habeas corpus petition challenging a state statute's constitutionality if the petitioner was in custody when the petition was filed, even if a state sentence appeal might later result in a non-custodial sentence.
• Veneri v. State OF Mo. & Dick Moore
  734 F.2d 391· 8th Cir.· 1984-05-18 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the appellant's claims were cognizable exclusively under 28 U.S.C. § 2254, requiring exhaustion of state remedies, and were also frivolous.
• Williams v. Maggio
  727 F.2d 1387· 5th Cir.· 1984-03-26 ·cited 6×
  The court held that while the state trial court erred by not holding a hearing on the voluntariness of the incriminating statement, the error was harmless because the record supported the statement's voluntariness and there was no evidence of coercion.
• Esposito v. Ira Mintz
  726 F.2d 371· 7th Cir.· 1984-02-10 ·cited 6×
  A habeas corpus petition challenging only the validity of a state detainer must be brought under 28 U.S.C. § 2254, and the petitioner must exhaust available state remedies.
• Rodriguez v. McKASKLE
  724 F.2d 463· 5th Cir.· 1984-02-06 ·cited 6×
  A federal court must dismiss a habeas corpus petition if the petitioner has not exhausted all available state remedies, even if an evidentiary hearing has been held in federal court and the merits of the petition have been briefed.
• Houston v. Mintzes
  722 F.2d 290· 6th Cir.· 1983-11-22 ·cited 6×
  A certificate of probable cause, once issued, brings the entire final judgment before the appellate court for review, regardless of any purported limitations by the issuing court.
• Welton Thomas v. Torres
  717 F.2d 248· 5th Cir.· 1983-10-17 ·cited 6×
  A prisoner's claims regarding parole denial must be brought as a habeas corpus petition, not a civil rights action, and require an allegation of constitutional deprivation.
• Browne v. W.J. Estelle, Jr.
  712 F.2d 1003· 5th Cir.· 1983-08-26 ·cited 6×
  The court held that improperly sentencing a defendant under a mandatory statute, thereby depriving him of the discretion afforded by state law, violates due process and is cognizable in federal habeas corpus.
• Marks v. Rees
  715 F.2d 372· 7th Cir.· 1983-08-24 ·cited 6×
  The court held that a federal district court in Indiana lacked jurisdiction to hear a habeas petition challenging a prior Indiana conviction, as the petitioner was in custody in Kentucky and Indiana had no interest in his present confinement.
• Prado McGEE, Jr. v. W.J. Estelle, Jr.
  704 F.2d 764· 5th Cir.· 1983-05-09 ·cited 6×
• Pool v. Wyrick
  703 F.2d 1064· 8th Cir.· 1983-04-06 ·cited 6×
  The court held that a significant delay in state post-conviction proceedings may justify waiving the exhaustion requirement for federal habeas corpus relief and that a § 1983 claim based on such delay becomes ripe when the state proceedings are resolved or a specific timeframe ex
• Zelenka v. Israel
  699 F.2d 421· 7th Cir.· 1983-02-09 ·cited 6×
  The court held that a federal habeas petition must be dismissed if it contains any unexhausted claims, even if other claims are exhausted.
• Towndrow v. Henderson
  692 F.2d 262· 2d Cir.· 1982-10-26 ·cited 6×
  The court affirmed the dismissal of the habeas corpus petition, finding that the claims raised were either unexhausted or forfeited due to failure to present them on direct appeal.
• United States ex rel. David G. Stevens v. The Cir. Court OF Milwaukee Cnty.
  675 F.2d 946· 7th Cir.· 1982-04-20 ·cited 6×
  A federal court should not grant pretrial habeas corpus relief to enjoin a state criminal trial on double jeopardy grounds when the defendant has not yet undergone a trial, even if a prior guilty plea was entered.
• Wade v. Lockhart
  674 F.2d 721· 8th Cir.· 1982-03-31 ·cited 6×
  The court held that while the exhaustion requirement for state remedies is not excused, the district court should not have dismissed the petition due to the significant and unexplained delay in state court proceedings.
• Ford v. Parratt
  673 F.2d 232· 8th Cir.· 1982-03-15 ·cited 6×
  The dissenting judge would affirm the district court's denial of habeas corpus relief, finding no demonstrated prejudice from counsel's alleged failure to investigate a rumor.
• Beryl Eaton v. Holbrook
  671 F.2d 670· 1st Cir.· 1982-03-05 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the district court improperly exercised its discretion in granting bail pending habeas corpus review because the appellee had not clearly demonstrated exhaustion of state remedies for her federal constitutional claim.
• Moore v. Wyrick
  668 F.2d 1007· 8th Cir.· 1982-01-27 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the district court erred in dismissing the habeas corpus petition for failure to exhaust state remedies without determining if the claim was previously considered or if further exhaustion would be futile.
• DOE v. DOE
  660 F.2d 101· 4th Cir.· 1981-09-21 ·cited 6×
  The court held that federal courts lack jurisdiction to entertain a petition for habeas corpus regarding child custody disputes between private parties, as such matters are reserved to the states.
• Davis v. Rendell
  659 F.2d 374· 3d Cir.· 1981-09-15 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the district court should address the prosecutor's immunity defense in the first instance, and that the case should be remanded for further proceedings.
• Boothe v. Superintendent, Woodbourne Corr. Facility & Honorable Robert Abrams, Attorney Gen. of the State of N.Y.
  656 F.2d 27· 2d Cir.· 1981-08-06 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the petitioner failed to exhaust his state remedies regarding the claim that the state denied him due process by failing to provide funds for electronic monitoring equipment.
• Flangas v. State BAR OF Nev.
  655 F.2d 946· 9th Cir.· 1981-05-29 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion by granting a preliminary injunction against state disciplinary proceedings because the appellant failed to exhaust available state remedies for alleged judicial bias.
• Spiegel v. Sandstrom
  637 F.2d 405· 5th Cir.· 1981-02-19 ·cited 6×
  A prior conviction, even if pending appeal, cannot be used for impeachment or to enhance punishment if it was constitutionally invalid.
• In re Cloyce Gilbert Little Light v. Crist
  649 F.2d 682· 9th Cir.· 1981-02-17 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the area of Hardin, Montana, was disestablished from the Crow Reservation, granting Montana courts jurisdiction, but remanded for further proceedings on claims of involuntary plea and lack of counsel.
• Camillo v. Wyrick
  640 F.2d 931· 8th Cir.· 1981-02-09 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying the habeas corpus petition, as the totality of the circumstances demonstrated the guilty plea was voluntary and the state court's findings were supported by the record.
• Walker v. Wegner
  624 F.2d 60· 8th Cir.· 1980-07-02 ·cited 6×
  The court held that abstention under Younger v. Harris is not appropriate because the administrative proceeding cannot resolve the constitutional claims and requiring exhaustion would cause undue delay and prior restraint.
• White v. Sowders
  644 F.2d 1177· 6th Cir.· 1980-07-01 ·cited 6×
  The Sixth Circuit held that a juvenile's constitutional rights were violated by an inadequate transfer order from juvenile to adult court, and federal habeas corpus relief was available despite procedural arguments by the state.
• Cerbo v. Fauver
  616 F.2d 714· 3d Cir.· 1980-03-13 ·cited 6×
  The court held that appellate counsel's tactical decision not to raise a tape sealing defense, based on then-existing adverse case law, did not constitute ineffective assistance of counsel under the Sixth Amendment, and an evidentiary hearing was not required.
• Hoover v. The State OF NEW York
  607 F.2d 1040· 2d Cir.· 1979-10-12 ·cited 6×
  The court affirmed the dismissal of the habeas corpus writ, finding that the petitioner had not properly presented his claim to the state courts, despite the state agreeing to waive procedural defenses.
• Harris v. Wilters
  596 F.2d 678· 5th Cir.· 1979-06-08 ·cited 6×
  The trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying appellant's motion for a mandatory preliminary injunction to fund his state coram nobis proceeding.
• Ralph v. Blackburn
  590 F.2d 1335· 5th Cir.· 1979-03-08 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the petitioner must exhaust state remedies before pursuing federal habeas corpus relief on the grounds that his sentence exceeds the statutory maximum or constitutes cruel and unusual punishment.
• Claud M. Brown v. Vermillion
  593 F.2d 321· 8th Cir.· 1979-02-23 ·cited 6×
  The court held that claims directly seeking release or reconsideration of parole must be brought as a habeas corpus petition, but other claims for injunctive and declaratory relief regarding due process standards are not exclusively habeas corpus.
• Thompson v. White
  591 F.2d 441· 8th Cir.· 1979-01-23 ·cited 6×
  The court held that while the jury selection claim was properly dismissed for failure to exhaust state remedies, other claims should be remanded for further proceedings on the merits after state courts began addressing them.
• McDANIEL v. State OF Okla.
  582 F.2d 1242· 10th Cir.· 1978-08-25 ·cited 6×
  Federal habeas corpus relief is not available for a Fourth Amendment claim if the state provided an opportunity for full and fair litigation of that claim, even if the state court found the admission of evidence to be harmless error.
• Williams v. McKENZIE
  576 F.2d 566· 4th Cir.· 1978-05-03 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the photographic identification was not unduly suggestive, reversing the grant of habeas corpus on that ground, but remanded for reconsideration of exhaustion of state remedies regarding exculpatory evidence.
• United States v. Maggard
  573 F.2d 926· 6th Cir.· 1978-04-17 ·cited 6×
  A federal court need not retry the constitutional validity of a prior state felony conviction in a prosecution for possession of a firearm by a convicted felon, absent facial invalidity.