Exhaustion Of State Remedies

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

• United States ex rel. Benjamin Reid v. Richmond
  277 F.2d 702· 2d Cir.· 1960-04-20 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the Connecticut Public Defender system is constitutional, but remanded the case for further proceedings to determine if the relator was denied due process due to the timing of counsel assignment and the effectiveness of his representation.
• Kurth v. Bennett
  274 F.2d 409· 8th Cir.· 1960-02-05 ·cited 2×
  A federal court should not grant a writ of habeas corpus to a state prisoner alleging perjured testimony if the prisoner presents no new evidence beyond what was before the state jury.
• Erwin Allison Shook v. State OF Ohio
  274 F.2d 853· 6th Cir.· 1960-02-04 ·cited 2×
  A federal court cannot grant a writ of habeas corpus to compel a state to bring a prisoner to trial on a pending indictment when the prisoner is lawfully serving a sentence for another crime and does not allege unlawful restraint.
• Myers v. Blalock
  271 F.2d 442· 4th Cir.· 1959-11-02 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the appellant failed to demonstrate exhaustion of state remedies, and the district court properly dismissed the petition.
• United States ex rel. Michael A. Garcia v. Martin
  271 F.2d 298· 2d Cir.· 1959-10-15 ·cited 2×
  The court held that a federal habeas petition failed to state a violation of federal constitutional rights when the petitioner was denied a free transcript for an appeal, as he had counsel and access to the transcript on file.
• Ezra Williams v. Heinze
  271 F.2d 308· 9th Cir.· 1959-09-22 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the defendant's application for a certificate of probable cause and leave to appeal in forma pauperis should be denied because no reasonably debatable issue is presented on appeal.
• Starkweather v. Greenholtz
  267 F.2d 858· 8th Cir.· 1959-06-05 ·cited 2×
  The federal court lacked jurisdiction to consider the habeas corpus petition because the petitioner had not raised his federal claims in the state courts. Furthermore, even if jurisdiction existed, the claims presented tactical decisions by counsel, not due process violations.
• United States ex rel. Joseph Marcial v. FAY
  267 F.2d 507· 2d Cir.· 1959-01-23 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the petitioner failed to sustain the burden of proving a lack of due process based on the absence of counsel at sentencing or alleged misapprehension by the sentencing judge.
• Gentlee Hollman v. Wyndham M. Manning
  262 F.2d 656· 4th Cir.· 1959-01-16 ·cited 2×
  A federal court will only entertain a state prisoner's habeas corpus application after all available state remedies, including appeals to the Supreme Court, have been exhausted.
• Emile Weston, Jr. v. Sigler
  262 F.2d 519· 5th Cir.· 1959-01-16 ·cited 2×
  The court affirmed the district court's denial of the habeas corpus petition because the petitioner failed to exhaust state remedies.
• United States v. Randolph
  262 F.2d 10· 7th Cir.· 1958-12-31 ·cited 2×
  The court held that a petitioner's failure to exhaust an adequate state remedy, due to untimely filing without excuse, bars federal habeas corpus relief.
• Jackson v. Steiner
  261 F.2d 447· 4th Cir.· 1958-12-05 ·cited 2×
  The Fourth Circuit held that a state prisoner seeking federal habeas corpus relief must exhaust state court remedies, and the Maryland Court of Appeals had not yet ruled on the prisoner's specific constitutional claim regarding a free transcript for a new trial motion.
• United States ex rel. Fred Hunter v. Bibb
  249 F.2d 839· 7th Cir.· 1957-12-10 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the prisoner's petition for a writ of habeas corpus was properly dismissed for failure to exhaust state remedies and due to pending state proceedings.
• Simpson v. Harley O. Teets
  248 F.2d 465· 9th Cir.· 1957-10-03 ·cited 2×
  The court held that without a certificate of probable cause, an appeal from a denial of a habeas corpus petition is not valid.
• United States ex rel. Peter Stevens v. Ragen
  244 F.2d 420· 7th Cir.· 1957-05-13 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the petitioner had not exhausted his state remedies because the Illinois courts had not yet determined whether his delay in filing a post-conviction petition was due to culpable negligence.
• Matter of the Application of Dupree POE
  241 F.2d 461· 9th Cir.· 1957-02-08 ·cited 2×
  The court held that a certificate of probable cause should be denied when the petitioner has not exhausted state remedies.
• Chapman v. Warden H. O. Teets of San Quentin
  241 F.2d 186· 9th Cir.· 1957-01-23 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the submitted document could not be entertained as an appeal due to untimeliness and lack of a certificate of probable cause, nor as a habeas corpus petition because the petitioner had not exhausted state remedies and presented an untenable legal argument.
• Meeks v. Lainson
  236 F.2d 395· 8th Cir.· 1956-08-20 ·cited 2×
  The court held that a federal court should not entertain a habeas corpus petition if the state court's denial of the claim was based on state law grounds, even if not explicitly stated, and no federal issue was presented to or passed upon by the state's highest court.
• Darcy v. Harley O. Teets
  232 F.2d 732· 9th Cir.· 1956-03-29 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the petitioner's appeal from the denial of habeas corpus relief did not present a substantial question and was not taken in good faith, thus denying the motion to proceed in forma pauperis.
• State of Minn. v. Swenson
  217 F.2d 66· 8th Cir.· 1954-12-06 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the petitioner had not exhausted his state remedies and that his detention was lawful, thus affirming the denial of his habeas corpus petition.
• Turner v. Eidson
  215 F.2d 728· 8th Cir.· 1954-09-13 ·cited 2×
  The court held that a federal court cannot grant habeas corpus relief on issues not first presented to and denied by state courts, absent a showing that no state remedy is available.
• Cruysen v. Scudder
  215 F.2d 512· 9th Cir.· 1954-08-13 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the federal district court lacked jurisdiction because the petitioner had not exhausted his state remedies, specifically by failing to petition the California state courts for a writ of habeas corpus.
• Rupp v. Teets
  214 F.2d 312· 9th Cir.· 1954-06-24 ·cited 2×
  The court held that an appeal from a denial of a writ of habeas corpus is frivolous if the petitioner has not exhausted state remedies.
• Dusseldorf v. Teets
  209 F.2d 754· 9th Cir.· 1954-01-13 ·cited 2×
  The failure of a state prisoner's appointed attorney to raise a constitutional claim on appeal constitutes a waiver of that claim, barring federal habeas corpus relief.
• Galloway v. Dowd
  204 F.2d 524· 7th Cir.· 1953-05-22 ·cited 2×
  Federal courts must deny habeas corpus petitions if the petitioner has failed to exhaust available state remedies, including timely raising constitutional issues according to state procedural rules.
• Schell v. Eidson
  203 F.2d 902· 8th Cir.· 1953-05-07 ·cited 2×
  The court held that a federal district court may deny a habeas corpus writ without a rehearing if the state courts have already fairly considered and adjudicated the issues presented.
• Cranor v. Cooper
  203 F.2d 833· 9th Cir.· 1953-04-30 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court erred in granting a writ of habeas corpus because the petitioner had not exhausted state remedies and no federal constitutional issue was presented.
• Darcy v. Heinze
  194 F.2d 664· 9th Cir.· 1952-02-13 ·cited 2×
  A state prisoner seeking federal habeas corpus relief must apply for certiorari to the U.S. Supreme Court as part of exhausting state remedies, even if the state court denied the petition without opinion.
• Anderson v. Eidson
  191 F.2d 989· 8th Cir.· 1951-10-19 ·cited 2×
  The federal district court erred in refusing to entertain a habeas corpus petition on the merits, as the petitioner raised a substantial issue of denial of due process under the Fourteenth Amendment for failure to appoint counsel in a capital case.
• United States ex rel. Barrigar v. Robinson
  189 F.2d 766· 7th Cir.· 1951-06-13 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the petitioner's allegations were insufficient to show a violation of due process and that he had not exhausted his state remedies.
• Goodman v. Lainson
  182 F.2d 814· 8th Cir.· 1950-06-15 ·cited 2×
  A federal court may entertain a habeas corpus petition from a state prisoner who has exhausted all available state remedies, even without showing exceptional circumstances of peculiar urgency.
• United States ex rel. Morrison v. Foster
  175 F.2d 495· 2d Cir.· 1949-06-16 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the denial of the petition for a writ of habeas corpus was correct because the appellant was properly indicted and his constitutional rights were not violated.
• United States ex rel. Carr v. Martin
  172 F.2d 519· 2d Cir.· 1949-02-11 ·cited 2×
  The court held that a federal district court lacks jurisdiction to review claimed errors in state courts, and habeas corpus is not a substitute for appeal.
• Thompson v. Smith
  161 F.2d 728· 9th Cir.· 1947-05-16 ·cited 2×
  The petition for a writ of certiorari is denied because it is procedurally improper and the petitioner has not exhausted state remedies.
• Canada v. Jones
  160 F.2d 811· 8th Cir.· 1947-04-18 ·cited 2×
  A federal court must dismiss a habeas corpus application if the petitioner has not exhausted all available state remedies, including appellate review.
• United States ex rel. Monder v. Ragen
  154 F.2d 290· 7th Cir.· 1946-03-21 ·cited 2×
  The court held that claims not properly raised in a habeas corpus action, the constitutionality of the Illinois Habitual Criminal Act, and failure to exhaust state remedies are grounds for dismissal.
• Williams v. Dowd
  153 F.2d 328· 7th Cir.· 1946-02-13 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court properly denied the petition for a writ of habeas corpus, affirming the judgment.
• People of State of Ill. Ex rel. Davidson v. Bennett
  153 F.2d 271· 7th Cir.· 1946-01-29 ·cited 2×
  A federal district court lacks jurisdiction to grant habeas corpus relief if the petitioner has not exhausted state court remedies, including seeking certiorari from the United States Supreme Court after denial of relief by the highest state court.
• Flansburg v. Kaiser
  144 F.2d 917· 8th Cir.· 1944-10-03 ·cited 2×
  The court held that a federal court should not intervene via habeas corpus when a state prisoner has not exhausted state remedies or sought review by the Supreme Court of the United States.
• United States ex rel. RAY v. Martin
  141 F.2d 300· 2d Cir.· 1944-01-28 ·cited 2×
• Moreno Mujica v. Sec'y, Dep't of Corr. (Pasco County)
  M.D. Fla.· 2024-10-02 ·cited 1×
  Kervin Moreno Mujica filed a federal habeas corpus petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 while his direct appeal was still pending in state court. The district court dismissed the petition as premature because Mujica had not exhausted his state court remedies, specifically his direct a
• Alcegaire v. Sec'y Fla. Dep't Of Corr.
  2022 WL 610584· M.D. Fla.· 2022-07-08 ·cited 1×
  The court held that a motion for reconsideration must identify manifest errors of law or fact, and that a motion for appointment of federal habeas counsel requires exhaustion of state remedies, with limited exceptions not met here.
• Lenard Anderson v. State
  313 So. 3d 1196· Fla. 1st DCA· 2021-03-31 ·cited 1×
  The appellate court denied a petition for relief from convictions and sentences, finding no merit in the petitioner's claims that his appellate counsel was ineffective. The court applied the Strickland standard for ineffective assistance of counsel, requiring both deficient perfo
• Menard v. Florida Attorney General (Collier County)
  2020 WL 2188675· M.D. Fla.· 2020-05-20 ·cited 1×
  James Matthew Menard, a Florida prisoner convicted of aggravated battery, armed trespass, and third-degree felony murder, sought federal habeas relief challenging his convictions and sentences on multiple grounds, including claims of ineffective assistance of counsel and sentenci
• Jones v. Sec'y, Dep't of Corr.
  M.D. Fla.· 2019-09-16 ·cited 1×
  The court held that the petitioner's claims were untimely or failed on the merits, and thus denied his petition for a writ of habeas corpus.
• Rhodes v. Target Corp.
  268 F. Supp. 674· M.D. Fla.· 2016-02-26 ·cited 1×
  The court held that severance of the plaintiffs' claims was warranted because, despite meeting the technical requirements for joinder, the claims arose from distinct factual circumstances and would lead to prejudice and inefficiency if tried together.
• Log Creek, LLC. v. Kessler
  717 F. Supp. 2d 1239· N.D. Fla.· 2010-06-03 ·cited 1×
  The court held that equal protection claims were adequately alleged, but procedural due process, taking, open meeting, and defamation claims failed for various reasons including ripeness, immunity, lack of recurrence, and failure to allege fault.
• Arnold v. McNeil
  622 F. Supp. 2d 1294· M.D. Fla.· 2009-03-31 ·cited 1×
  The State failed to disclose material information concerning a key witness's crimes, violating the defendant's due process rights under Brady v. Maryland.
• Caracciolo v. McDonough
  456 F. Supp. 2d 1240· S.D. Fla.· 2006-10-18 ·cited 1×
  The court held that the petitioner, Mr. Caracciolo, failed to establish actual innocence to overcome the procedural bar on his claims, and therefore denied his petition for a writ of habeas corpus.
• Zocaras v. Castro
  158 F. Supp. 946· S.D. Fla.· 2005-10-19 ·cited 1×