Exhaustion Of State Remedies

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

• Pillette v. Dale Foltz & Frank Kelley
  824 F.2d 494· 6th Cir.· 1987-07-23 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the petitioner failed to exhaust his state remedies for his ineffective assistance of counsel claim and that futility did not excuse this failure.
• Meade v. Meade
  812 F.2d 1473· 4th Cir.· 1987-03-03 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the Virginia court retained continuing jurisdiction under the PKPA, requiring North Carolina courts to enforce its custody order.
• Kilby v. Otie Jones
  809 F.2d 324· 6th Cir.· 1987-01-16 ·cited 4×
• Fest v. Bartee
  804 F.2d 559· 9th Cir.· 1986-11-14 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the appellant must exhaust his claims in Nebraska state court because Nebraska retains jurisdiction and constructive custody under the Interstate Corrections Compact.
• Garofolo v. Coomb
  804 F.2d 201· 2d Cir.· 1986-10-28 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the petitioner's claims regarding prosecutorial misconduct and erroneous alibi instructions were not of constitutional magnitude and were harmless error, and his Sixth Amendment claim was barred by Supreme Court precedent.
• Duffy v. Foltz
  804 F.2d 50· 6th Cir.· 1986-10-23 ·cited 4×
  The court held that a defendant's counsel's concession of factual guilt to pursue an insanity defense does not violate the right to a jury trial or due process, and that sanity is not an element of the crimes under Michigan law.
• Red Martin Cain v. Petrovsky
  798 F.2d 1194· 8th Cir.· 1986-08-20 ·cited 4×
  The court held that federal courts lack jurisdiction under § 2241 to grant relief for violations of state law or state speedy trial provisions, and that jail time served in connection with a dropped federal charge is not creditable against a federal sentence for unrelated offense
• Wickstrom v. Schardt
  798 F.2d 268· 7th Cir.· 1986-08-19 ·cited 4×
  The court affirmed the dismissal of the habeas corpus petition because at least one claim was unexhausted and the petitioner was no longer in custody.
• Daniel v. Warden, State Corr. Inst. AT Huntingdon, PA. & the Attorney Gen. of the State of Pa. Appeal of John Robert Daniel
  794 F.2d 880· 3d Cir.· 1986-07-08 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court erred in applying the presumption of correctness under 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d) to the state court's determination of the double jeopardy claim, but affirmed the denial of the writ because the double jeopardy claim lacked merit.
• Holland v. Scully
  797 F.2d 57· 2d Cir.· 1986-07-07 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the admission of co-defendants' confessions, in light of the Supreme Court's decision in Lee v. Illinois, constituted a Bruton violation that could not be considered harmless error.
• Holley v. Smith
  792 F.2d 1046· 11th Cir.· 1986-06-30 ·cited 4×
  A sentence of life without parole under Alabama's Habitual Felony Offender Act for a violent Class A felony, following multiple prior felony convictions, is not unconstitutionally disproportionate under the Eighth Amendment.
• Bautista v. O.L. McCOTTER
  793 F.2d 109· 5th Cir.· 1986-06-30 ·cited 4×
  A Texas inmate seeking federal habeas relief has not exhausted state remedies if they failed to petition the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals for review of their conviction, even if review is discretionary.
• Norfleet Lucas v. Hadden
  790 F.2d 365· 3d Cir.· 1986-05-14 ·cited 4×
  A federal court cannot grant bail to a state prisoner seeking habeas corpus relief absent extraordinary circumstances, especially when state remedies have not been exhausted.
• Bradburn v. O.L. McCOTTER
  786 F.2d 627· 5th Cir.· 1986-01-28 ·cited 4×
  The state waived its exhaustion defense by not raising it in the district court, and the petitioner's Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination was not violated by police questioning.
• Petty v. O.L. McCOTTER
  779 F.2d 299· 5th Cir.· 1986-01-03 ·cited 4×
  The court held that a pro se petitioner should be allowed to amend his complaint to allege facts supporting his claim of ineffective assistance of counsel, even if those facts are raised for the first time on appeal.
• Bumgarner v. Bloodworth
  768 F.2d 297· 8th Cir.· 1985-07-24 ·cited 4×
  The state appealed an order dismissing drug trafficking charges against appellees, which were based on an investigation using a confidential informant, Robert Bennett, who had an agreement for a reduced sentence.
• Fisher v. Rose
  757 F.2d 789· 6th Cir.· 1985-03-26 ·cited 4×
  The district court abused its discretion by barring retrial based on the state's delay in retrying the petitioner, as the petitioner was no longer held under the constitutionally defective conviction.
• Borning v. Burl Cain
  754 F.2d 1151· 5th Cir.· 1985-02-14 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court erred in dismissing the petition without considering the petitioner's claim of denial of meaningful access to the law library, which impacts the right to an effective direct appeal.
• Kathie Boudin v. Thomas
  737 F.2d 261· 2d Cir.· 1984-06-26 ·cited 4×
  A prisoner's claim for release from administrative segregation into the general population is not a 'civil action' under the Equal Access to Justice Act if it is treated as a habeas corpus petition.
• Wayne v. White
  735 F.2d 324· 8th Cir.· 1984-05-31 ·cited 4×
  The court held that a state prisoner's federal habeas corpus petition may be dismissed for deliberate bypass of state remedies, even if state remedies are technically unavailable.
• Fuentes v. Moran
  733 F.2d 176· 1st Cir.· 1984-05-04 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the police conduct did not violate Fuentes's Fifth or Sixth Amendment rights, and thus affirmed the denial of his habeas corpus petition.
• Lacy v. Gabriel
  732 F.2d 7· 1st Cir.· 1984-04-11 ·cited 4×
  The court held that a Sixth Amendment confrontation clause claim, raised sua sponte by the district court and not exhausted in state courts, renders a habeas petition "mixed" and requires dismissal of that claim, but the petition is not considered mixed if the petitioner only rai
• United States v. Winter
  730 F.2d 825· 1st Cir.· 1984-03-20 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the appellant was not entitled to credit on his federal sentence for time spent in state custody, as the state confinement was not exclusively the product of federal action and the constitutional claim was not properly raised.
• Isidoro Cruz-Sanchez v. Cordero
  728 F.2d 1531· 1st Cir.· 1984-03-09 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the petitioner had not exhausted his state remedies regarding his claim for a new trial based on new evidence, and thus his federal habeas petition was properly dismissed.
• Johnson v. Scully
  727 F.2d 222· 2d Cir.· 1984-01-27 ·cited 4×
  The conduct of the state trial judge, though disquieting and extensive, did not transgress constitutional standards for a fair trial under the Due Process Clause.
• Watkins v. Callahan
  724 F.2d 1038· 1st Cir.· 1984-01-13 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the post-telephone call statements were admissible, the Massachusetts felony murder theory was constitutional, and the denial of a continuance did not violate the Sixth Amendment.
• Alcorn v. Smith
  724 F.2d 37· 6th Cir.· 1983-12-20 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the petitioner had not exhausted state remedies because he failed to properly present his claims, including ineffective assistance of counsel to excuse procedural default, to the state courts.
• Minor v. Lucas
  697 F.2d 697· 5th Cir.· 1983-02-07 ·cited 4×
  The court held that a federal habeas petitioner must present constitutional claims to state courts in a constitutional framework, not just state law grounds, to satisfy the exhaustion requirement.
• Smith v. Wyrick
  693 F.2d 808· 8th Cir.· 1982-12-01 ·cited 4×
  The court held that a federal court must grant an evidentiary hearing on a habeas petition if relevant facts are in dispute and a fair hearing was not granted in state court, but affirmed the denial because the petitioner's claim could be resolved on the record.
• Subilosky v. Callahan
  689 F.2d 7· 1st Cir.· 1982-09-24 ·cited 4×
  The court affirmed the denial of the petition for a writ of habeas corpus, finding no constitutional error in the state court's denial of a new trial.
• Nichols J. Romano v. Wyrick
  681 F.2d 555· 8th Cir.· 1982-07-07 ·cited 4×
  The court affirmed the dismissal of the habeas petition regarding the reckless driving conviction, finding no jurisdiction, and dismissed the probation revocation claim for failure to exhaust state remedies.
• Carver v. Mr. Joe R. Martin & the Attorney Gen. of The State of S.C.
  664 F.2d 932· 4th Cir.· 1981-11-24 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the defendant was tried and convicted under the correct statute, despite the indictment referencing a repealed statute, because the jury instructions and verdict clearly indicated the new statute was applied.
• Seemiller v. Wyrick
  663 F.2d 805· 8th Cir.· 1981-11-11 ·cited 4×
  The court held that while delay in state proceedings can be a factor, it does not automatically excuse the exhaustion requirement unless the delay is unreasonable and prevents effective remedy. The court vacated the district court's dismissal and remanded for further consideratio
• Holiday v. Wyrick
  663 F.2d 789· 8th Cir.· 1981-11-10 ·cited 4×
  The court affirmed the denial of the petition for writ of habeas corpus because the petitioner raised new claims on appeal that were not presented to the district court and had not been exhausted in state courts.
• Crisp v. Mayabb
  668 F.2d 1127· 10th Cir.· 1981-09-29 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the state's petition for rehearing should be denied because the petitioner made a bona fide effort to exhaust state remedies, and the state's subsequent arguments lacked merit.
• McNULTY v. Antone Olim
  652 F.2d 1369· 9th Cir.· 1981-08-14 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the appellant's trial counsel's alleged errors did not constitute ineffective assistance of counsel because they did not prejudice the appellant under the applicable legal standards.
• Rennie Johnson v. Fogg
  653 F.2d 750· 2d Cir.· 1981-07-14 ·cited 4×
  The dissenting judge believes the case should be remanded for an evidentiary hearing to determine if the guilty plea was based on a mistaken belief about the maximum sentence.
• Jones v. Foltz
  646 F.2d 1172· 6th Cir.· 1981-04-29 ·cited 4×
  A habeas petitioner has exhausted state remedies even if a more complete review is theoretically possible after the state's highest court has already considered the issue.
• Fletcher v. Warden, United States Penitentiary, Leavenworth, Kansas
  641 F.2d 850· 10th Cir.· 1981-02-13 ·cited 4×
  The court held that one appeal was moot due to the prisoner's return to state custody, another was barred by failure to exhaust state remedies, and the third was affirmed based on prior precedent interpreting 18 U.S.C. § 5003(a).
• Haag v. Ward
  632 F.2d 206· 2d Cir.· 1980-09-30 ·cited 4×
  New York Penal Law § 70.30(1)(a) does not deny equal protection to a prisoner who has completed a prior felony sentence before commencing a second felony sentence.
• Carden v. State OF Mont.
  626 F.2d 82· 9th Cir.· 1980-06-20 ·cited 4×
  Federal courts should not intervene via pretrial habeas corpus in state criminal prosecutions absent "special circumstances" demonstrating irreparable injury or bad faith prosecution.
• Salama v. Commonwealth OF Va.
  605 F.2d 1329· 4th Cir.· 1979-10-05 ·cited 4×
  The court held that a case should not be remanded for further proceedings when the initial dismissal was proper, especially when the state court's decision was not presented to the district court.
• Bennie Dixon Burton v. Oliver
  599 F.2d 49· 5th Cir.· 1979-07-03 ·cited 4×
  A federal court does not require a prisoner to seek state collateral relief on issues already raised on direct appeal before filing for federal habeas corpus relief.
• United States ex rel. Franklin Parish v. Elrod
  589 F.2d 327· 7th Cir.· 1979-01-04 ·cited 4×
  The court held that a pretrial petition for federal habeas corpus is premature when the petitioner has not exhausted state remedies, absent special circumstances.
• Tippett v. Roberts
  587 F.2d 373· 8th Cir.· 1978-11-08 ·cited 4×
  The court affirmed the dismissal of the habeas corpus petition, finding that federal inquiry into the Fourth Amendment claim was limited by Stone v. Powell, as the issue was fully litigated in state courts.
• Fay Monroe van Meter v. State OF Iowa
  578 F.2d 218· 8th Cir.· 1978-06-30 ·cited 4×
  The court affirmed the district court's denial of the habeas corpus petition, finding no merit in the appellant's claims and no error in the district court's procedural rulings.
• Piercy v. Parratt
  579 F.2d 470· 8th Cir.· 1978-06-28 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the federal district court should retain jurisdiction but stay its hand pending the outcome of the appellant's current state court action, with a provision for the federal court to proceed if the state courts do not rule within ninety days.
• Kendall Brown v. Wilmot
  572 F.2d 404· 2d Cir.· 1978-03-15 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the federal district court properly denied a petition for a writ of habeas corpus because the petitioner had not exhausted his state remedies.
• Flowers v. State OF Ohio
  564 F.2d 748· 6th Cir.· 1977-11-08 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the trial court's refusal to allow cross-examination regarding suggestive out-of-court identifications violated the defendant's Sixth Amendment right to confrontation.
• Wolder v. Clare J. Rahm
  549 F.2d 543· 8th Cir.· 1977-02-09 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the plaintiff's federal civil rights action was barred by the Iowa statute of limitations for claims against a decedent's estate, despite not being barred by the doctrine of election of remedies.