Exhaustion Of State Remedies

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

• Heirens v. Mizell
  729 F.2d 449· 7th Cir.· 1984-02-24 ·cited 42×
  The court reversed its prior holding in Welsh v. Mizell, finding that the application of Illinois parole criterion (2) to inmates who committed crimes before its enactment does not violate the ex post facto clause because prior parole boards already considered similar factors.
• James v. Reese
  546 F.2d 325· 9th Cir.· 1976-12-10 ·cited 42×
  The court affirmed the district court's dismissal of the habeas corpus petition because the petitioner failed to exhaust available state remedies for all claims raised.
• Ellis Eaton, Jr. v. Wyrick
  528 F.2d 477· 8th Cir.· 1975-12-31 ·cited 42×
  The court held that the petitioner failed to exhaust available state remedies for his claims, and the futility exception did not apply. A new claim based on a subsequently invalidated statute also requires initial presentation to state courts.
• Atwell v. State OF Ark.
  426 F.2d 912· 8th Cir.· 1970-05-21 ·cited 42×
  The court held that the petitioner's claims regarding illegal arrest, coerced confession, and improper admission of prior conviction evidence did not rise to the level of federal constitutional violations reviewable by habeas corpus.
• Petition of Joseph Ernst for a Writ of Habeas Corpus
  294 F.2d 556· 3d Cir.· 1961-08-31 ·cited 42×
• Harris v. Pulley
  885 F.2d 1354· 9th Cir.· 1988-07-08 ·cited 41×
  The court held that the extensive pretrial publicity did not create a presumption of prejudice and that the voir dire examination demonstrated the jury was impartial, thus denying the claim of a violation of the right to a fair trial.
• Burkett v. Cunningham
  826 F.2d 1208· 3d Cir.· 1987-07-10 ·cited 41×
  The majority erred in ordering the discharge of convictions based on a flawed 'law of the case' finding of prejudice from sentencing delay.
• Butcher v. Marquez
  758 F.2d 373· 9th Cir.· 1985-04-16 ·cited 41×
  The court held that the petitioner failed to demonstrate ineffective assistance of counsel or a constitutional violation from the admission of evidence, thus affirming the dismissal of his habeas petition.
• Askari Abdullah Muhammad v. State
  426 So. 2d 533· Fla.· 1982-12-16 ·cited 41×
  Muhammad appealed the denial of his Rule 3.850 motion to vacate his capital murder conviction and death sentence, claiming ineffective assistance of trial counsel. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the denial without an evidentiary hearing, finding that the motion and case recor
• Davis v. Campbell
  608 F.2d 317· 8th Cir.· 1979-11-02 ·cited 41×
  The court held that claims not exhausted in state courts must be remanded for dismissal, while claims previously decided on direct appeal and found not to raise constitutional issues are affirmed.
• Stonebreaker v. Smyth
  163 F.2d 498· 4th Cir.· 1947-08-20 ·cited 41×
  The court held that a federal district court should not grant habeas corpus relief when state courts have previously denied relief on the merits and the Supreme Court has denied certiorari, unless state remedies are inadequate.
• Lamarca v. Sec'y, Dep't OF Corr., Attorney Gen. of the State of Fla.
  568 F.3d 929· 11th Cir.· 2009-05-19 ·cited 40×
  Anthony Lamarca, a death-row inmate convicted of first-degree murder, sought a certificate of appealability (COA) to appeal three claims from his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 federal habeas corpus petition. The Eleventh Circuit denied the COA application because Lamarca failed to make a subs
• Burt Beavers v. A.L. Lockhart
  755 F.2d 657· 8th Cir.· 1985-02-25 ·cited 40×
  The court held that a habeas petitioner's claim of ineffective assistance of counsel for failing to challenge the consecutive sentencing decision on appeal warrants an evidentiary hearing, as the record did not demonstrate the trial judge exercised discretion in imposing consecut
• McCARTHY v. Manson
  714 F.2d 234· 2d Cir.· 1983-08-09 ·cited 40×
  The court held that the state waived its right to raise the speedy trial exhaustion issue by failing to object to the magistrate's recommendation and consenting to the entry of judgment.
• Coleman v. Zant
  708 F.2d 541· 11th Cir.· 1983-06-10 ·cited 40×
  The court held that the petitioner is entitled to an evidentiary hearing on the issue of whether pretrial publicity and community atmosphere were so prejudicial as to deny him a fair trial, and that the district court erred in denying discovery and a hearing.
• Howie Ray Robinson v. Wade
  686 F.2d 298· 5th Cir.· 1982-09-20 ·cited 40×
  The Court held that the defendant's reprosecution was not barred by the Double Jeopardy Clause, as the prosecutor's conduct, while improper, did not demonstrate an intent to provoke a mistrial, and the court reporter's negligence in losing a transcript did not trigger double jeop
• Twitty v. Smith
  614 F.2d 325· 2d Cir.· 1979-12-11 ·cited 40×
  The court held that the petitioner had not exhausted state remedies for all claims and that the exhausted claims did not meet the standard for ineffective assistance of counsel.
• Nowell A. Brathwaite v. Manson
  527 F.2d 363· 2d Cir.· 1975-11-20 ·cited 40×
  The court held that the admission of an identification obtained through unnecessarily suggestive means, even if the witness had some opportunity to observe, violates due process and requires exclusion of the evidence.
• Harris v. Superior Court OF the State OF Cal. For the Cnty. OF LOS Angeles
  500 F.2d 1124· 9th Cir.· 1974-07-12 ·cited 40×
  A California Supreme Court 'postcard denial' of a habeas corpus petition, without citation or explicit statement of procedural grounds, satisfies the federal exhaustion requirement, as it indicates a decision on the merits.
• Pleas v. Wainwright
  441 F.2d 56· 5th Cir.· 1971-04-15 ·cited 40×
  The court held that evidentiary rulings, jury instructions, and sufficiency of evidence claims do not present constitutional issues cognizable on federal habeas corpus review.
• Dixon v. State
  388 F.2d 424· 5th Cir.· 1968-01-03 ·cited 40×
  The court held that an inordinate and unjustified delay by a state court in ruling on a post-conviction motion can render state remedies ineffective, thus permitting federal habeas corpus review.
• McGARRAH v. Dutton
  381 F.2d 161· 5th Cir.· 1967-07-26 ·cited 40×
  The court held that the record did not sufficiently demonstrate that the appellant was advised of his right to counsel or that he intelligently waived it.
• Barry v. Sigler
  373 F.2d 835· 8th Cir.· 1967-03-16 ·cited 40×
  The court held that the appellant had not exhausted his state remedies because the state court had not yet ruled on the merits of his claim, and any delay was due to the appellant's own actions.
• Tolg v. Grimes
  355 F.2d 92· 5th Cir.· 1966-01-24 ·cited 40×
• United States ex rel. Augustine Bagley v. Honorable J. E. LaVALLEE
  332 F.2d 890· 2d Cir.· 1964-06-11 ·cited 40×
  The court held that the petitioner must first exhaust his state remedies before seeking federal habeas corpus relief, as New York has provided a statutory procedure for challenging prior convictions used for sentence enhancement.
• Anderson v. Heinze
  258 F.2d 479· 9th Cir.· 1958-06-19 ·cited 40×
  The court held that due process does not require the appointment of counsel for a state prisoner seeking to appeal in forma pauperis from a denial of habeas corpus when the issues raised are not plainly frivolous and have been previously litigated.
• Cranor v. Gonzales
  226 F.2d 83· 9th Cir.· 1955-08-22 ·cited 40×
  A federal district court has the authority to hold hearings and make independent factual determinations in a habeas corpus proceeding, even if the issue was previously litigated in state court, particularly when the claim involves physical coercion rendering a confession involunt
• Sanderlin v. Smyth
  138 F.2d 729· 4th Cir.· 1943-11-08 ·cited 40×
  A federal court should not grant a writ of habeas corpus to a state prisoner unless there has been a gross violation of constitutional rights denying a fair trial, and all state remedies have been exhausted.
• Osborn v. Shillinger
  861 F.2d 612· 10th Cir.· 1988-11-07 ·cited 39×
  The court held that the federal district court did not err in reaching the merits of Osborn's habeas corpus petition, as state remedies were exhausted by the time of appellate review and any procedural bar was not sufficiently established to preclude federal consideration.
• United States ex rel. James C. Haynes v. McKENDRICK
  481 F.2d 152· 2d Cir.· 1973-06-14 ·cited 39×
• United States ex rel. Robert Harris v. State OF Ill.
  457 F.2d 191· 7th Cir.· 1972-03-17 ·cited 39×
  The court held that even if a state trial court improperly placed the burden of proof on the defendant regarding the independence of an in-court identification, a federal court on habeas review can still determine independence from the record if adequate, and if independent, no c
• Parton v. Wyrick
  614 F.2d 154· 8th Cir.· 1980-01-18 ·cited 38×
  The court held that the appellant waived his right to raise claims of ineffective assistance of counsel regarding prior convictions due to deliberate bypass of state remedies and failure to object at trial. The court also held that the appellant failed to state a claim for habeas
• Keener v. Ridenour
  594 F.2d 581· 6th Cir.· 1979-03-28 ·cited 38×
  A delayed appeal under Ohio law is not available if a direct appeal has already been pursued. However, a prisoner may seek post-conviction relief for claims that render a judgment void.
• Mrs. Patsy Ruth White v. Dallas Indep. Sch. Dist.
  581 F.2d 556· 5th Cir.· 1978-10-06 ·cited 38×
• Chenault v. Stynchcombe
  581 F.2d 444· 5th Cir.· 1978-10-03 ·cited 38×
  The court held that claims regarding sentencing instructions and death-qualified juries were not properly before it due to failure to exhaust state remedies, and affirmed denial of other claims.
• Scott v. Plante
  532 F.2d 939· 3d Cir.· 1976-03-29 ·cited 38×
  The court held that the district court improperly dismissed the plaintiff's claims, including those regarding involuntary medication, confinement without treatment, physical conditions, unconstitutional confinement, and procedural issues in hearings, and that the plaintiff's requ
• Drexler v. Sw. Dubois Sch. Corp.
  504 F.2d 836· 7th Cir.· 1974-10-15 ·cited 38×
  The dissenting judge believes the District Judge's decision should be affirmed.
• Application of Larry Buffalo Chief v. State OF S.D. & Don R. Erickson
  425 F.2d 271· 8th Cir.· 1970-04-30 ·cited 38×
  The court held that the issue of whether a conflict of interest arose during trial, depriving the petitioner of effective counsel, had not been fully and fairly presented to the South Dakota courts and therefore remanded for further proceedings in the state court.
• United States ex rel. Wilbert Ross v. McMANN
  409 F.2d 1016· 2d Cir.· 1969-02-26 ·cited 38×
  The dissenting opinion argues that voluntary guilty pleas, entered on advice of counsel, waive all prior non-jurisdictional defects. It contends that the Supreme Court's decision in Jackson v. Denno, which requires hearings on the voluntariness of confessions used at trial, shoul
• Mitchell v. Stephens
  353 F.2d 129· 8th Cir.· 1965-11-24 ·cited 38×
  The court affirmed the denial of the habeas corpus petition, finding no constitutional violations in jury selection, death penalty application, confession admission, or counsel representation.
• Simmons v. A.L. Lockhart
  915 F.2d 372· 8th Cir.· 1990-09-27 ·cited 37×
  The court held that while ineffective assistance of post-conviction counsel can excuse procedural defaults, the petitioner failed to demonstrate an actual adverse effect on his defense from his trial counsel's alleged conflict of interest, thus his claim of ineffective assistance
• Ipcia M. Kercado-Melendez v. Awilda Aponte-Roque
  829 F.2d 255· 1st Cir.· 1987-09-22 ·cited 37×
  The court held that the plaintiff was in the midst of administrative proceedings when she filed her federal suit, and thus should have exhausted state remedies before proceeding in federal court.
• Haggins v. Warden, Fort Pillow State Farm
  715 F.2d 1050· 6th Cir.· 1983-08-11 ·cited 37×
  The admission of a child victim's hearsay statements, made under the stress of excitement from a startling event, does not violate the Sixth Amendment confrontation clause if they possess sufficient indicia of reliability, even if the child is unavailable to testify.
• Cumbo v. Eyman
  409 F.2d 400· 9th Cir.· 1969-04-07 ·cited 37×
  The habeas corpus proceeding was rendered moot because the state conviction underlying the sentence had been reversed by the state appellate court.
• Dinwiddie v. Brown
  230 F.2d 465· 5th Cir.· 1956-03-07 ·cited 37×
  The court held that allegations of fraud and the existence of state segregation laws, without more, do not state a federal cause of action cognizable in federal court absent diversity jurisdiction.
• Pitts v. Cook
  923 F.2d 1568· 11th Cir.· 1991-02-21 ·cited 36×
  The novelty of a constitutional claim, if not reasonably available to counsel, can constitute cause to excuse a procedural default.
• Prihoda v. McCAUGHTRY
  910 F.2d 1379· 7th Cir.· 1990-08-14 ·cited 36×
• Hughes v. Idaho State Bd. OF Corr.
  800 F.2d 905· 9th Cir.· 1986-09-25 ·cited 36×
  The court held that a petitioner's failure to appeal a post-conviction relief denial to the state's highest court constitutes a procedural default requiring a showing of cause and prejudice to obtain federal habeas relief.
• Williams v. Duckworth
  724 F.2d 1439· 7th Cir.· 1984-01-05 ·cited 36×
  A federal court may not consider a habeas claim that a state prisoner has waived by failing to raise it in state court proceedings, absent a showing of 'cause' for the failure and 'prejudice' resulting therefrom.
• United States v. Elrod
  716 F.2d 431· 7th Cir.· 1983-08-19 ·cited 36×
  The court held that the trial court's explanation of potential conflicts of interest and the petitioner's affirmative response constituted a knowing and intelligent waiver of his Sixth Amendment right to counsel free from such conflicts.