Exhaustion Of State Remedies

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

• Campanale v. Harris
  724 F.2d 276· 2d Cir.· 1983-12-09
  A federal court should not grant habeas corpus relief for a claim based on a new Supreme Court rule if the petitioner has not first presented that claim to the state courts, absent specific exceptions to the exhaustion requirement.
• United States v. Dir., Dep't OF Corr., State OF Ill.
  721 F.2d 586· 7th Cir.· 1983-11-16
  The court held that the district court erred in dismissing the habeas corpus petition for failure to exhaust state remedies, reversing the dismissal.
• Vail v. W.J. Estelle, Jr.
  711 F.2d 630· 5th Cir.· 1983-08-08
  A federal habeas court must consider a petition when state appellate procedures are so delayed as to render the exhaustion requirement meaningless, even if the petitioner has not exhausted state remedies.
• Bruce v. W.J. Estelle, Jr.
  707 F.2d 155· 5th Cir.· 1983-06-13
  The federal district court's handling or mishandling of a habeas corpus petition cannot serve as a basis for setting aside an otherwise valid state court conviction.
• Hill v. Zimmerman
  709 F.2d 232· 3d Cir.· 1983-06-09
  The court held that the petitioner had not fairly presented his claim regarding the malice jury instruction to the state courts, thus requiring dismissal of the habeas petition for failure to exhaust state remedies.
• Gibson v. Spalding
  703 F.2d 362· 9th Cir.· 1983-02-09
  The court vacated its prior decision and remanded the case to the district court for reconsideration in light of intervening Supreme Court decisions.
• Johnson v. Balkcom
  695 F.2d 1320· 11th Cir.· 1983-01-17
  The court held that the district court's dismissal of the habeas petition was proper, affirming the denial of relief on both ineffective assistance of counsel and jury instruction claims.
• Grubbs v. Hoyt C. Cupp
  693 F.2d 866· 9th Cir.· 1982-11-29
  The court held that a petitioner must exhaust state remedies by applying to the state's highest court, even if it seems futile, to satisfy federal habeas corpus requirements.
• Genter v. Louie L. Wainwright
  678 F.2d 934· 11th Cir.· 1982-06-14
  A federal district court must dismiss without prejudice a habeas corpus petition presenting both unexhausted and exhausted claims to avoid piecemeal litigation.
• Dr. Ing. H. C. F. Porsche AG v. Classic Motor Carriages, Inc.
  316 F. Supp. 1039· S.D. Fla.· 1982-01-13
• Waters v. Wainwright
  527 F. Supp. 275· M.D. Fla.· 1981-12-03
  The court held that the petitioner has not established his contentions and has not been deprived of any constitutional right, thus his habeas petition is dismissed.
• Henderson v. State OF Mo.
  661 F.2d 107· 8th Cir.· 1981-10-19
  The court held that the petitioner's habeas corpus filing was premature because it had not first been made to the appropriate federal district court.
• Stephens v. Wyrick
  659 F.2d 94· 8th Cir.· 1981-09-14
  The court held that the district court's dismissal of the habeas petition was proper, affirming the denial of relief on the claims of involuntary guilty plea and unconstitutional sentencing statute.
• Hall v. Lou V. Brewer
  656 F.2d 364· 8th Cir.· 1981-08-17
  The court held that the petitioner did not deliberately bypass state remedies and that the federal district court erred in dismissing the habeas petition on grounds of procedural waiver and failure to exhaust.
• Schleicher v. Wyrick
  656 F.2d 288· 8th Cir.· 1981-07-30
  The court held that the prisoner's habeas corpus petition should be affirmed, not on the ground of failure to exhaust state remedies, but because the prisoner failed to show a due process violation.
• D. D. v. Honorable Bill White
  650 F.2d 749· 5th Cir.· 1981-07-16
  The court held that a federal district court must dismiss a mixed petition for a writ of habeas corpus, which contains both exhausted and unexhausted claims, without prejudice due to the petitioner's failure to exhaust available state remedies.
• Bonner v. Wyrick
  650 F.2d 150· 8th Cir.· 1981-06-03
  A guilty plea is not rendered invalid simply because it was motivated by the defendant's desire to avoid a potentially greater sentence after trial.
• Davis v. Bryant Muellar
  643 F.2d 521· 8th Cir.· 1981-03-06
  The state court should not exercise jurisdiction over an Indian arrested in violation of a tribal extradition ordinance, as such action impedes tribal self-government and is preempted by federal law.
• Ulysses Smith v. Blackburn
  632 F.2d 1194· 5th Cir.· 1980-12-15
  The court held that a conviction by a five-member jury is unconstitutional, and the petitioner did not waive this right by electing to be tried by such a jury.
• Bradenburg v. Beaman
  632 F.2d 120· 10th Cir.· 1980-10-16
  The court held that a pro se litigant must follow procedural rules, and the trial court did not err in refusing to entertain a complaint that failed to comply with local rules.
• Rawls v. Mabry
  630 F.2d 654· 8th Cir.· 1980-10-02
  The court held that the petitioner's claims of ineffective assistance of counsel and involuntary plea were without merit, affirming the dismissal of his habeas corpus petition.
• Otho Thompson v. Capps
  626 F.2d 389· 5th Cir.· 1980-09-22
• Williams v. Marshall
  628 F.2d 934· 6th Cir.· 1980-08-26
  The court held that the appellant failed to exhaust state remedies because he did not file the required affidavit of error to pursue his appeal in state court.
• State v. Matera
  378 So. 2d 1283· Fla. 3d DCA· 1979-12-28
  Florida appeals a circuit court's order vacating a defendant's 1967 robbery conviction. The court reversed the vacation order, holding that the trial court improperly denied the State its right to appeal by accepting a nolo contendere plea and resentencing the defendant in the sa
• Carmelo Canet v. Turner
  606 F.2d 89· 5th Cir.· 1979-11-07
  The court held that a claim regarding an illegal sentence, based on a recent Florida Supreme Court ruling, was not exhausted and must be remanded for state court consideration. Other claims were affirmed.
• Clennie H. Saylor v. Overberg
  608 F.2d 670· 6th Cir.· 1979-09-14
  The court held that the petitioner's claim of insufficient evidence was not grounds for habeas relief under the applicable standard, and other claims were properly dismissed.
• United States ex rel. Samuel Miller v. Louie L. Wainwright
  598 F.2d 431· 5th Cir.· 1979-07-06
  The court held that a habeas corpus petition containing both exhausted and unexhausted claims must be dismissed without prejudice for failure to exhaust state remedies.
• Jones v. The State OF Md. & her agents the Honorable Frank E. Cicone
  584 F.2d 663· 4th Cir.· 1978-10-04
  The court held that the plaintiff failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted because the amended complaint did not allege perjury or conspiracy to commit perjury by the police officers.
• Staten v. State OF Ala.
  576 F.2d 654· 5th Cir.· 1978-07-14
  The court held that the federal district court erred in granting a writ of habeas corpus because the petitioner failed to exhaust state remedies by not presenting the ineffective assistance of appellate counsel claim to a state court.
• Fried v. Carey
  620 F.2d 591· 7th Cir.· 1978-06-26
  The court held that federal courts are prohibited by 28 U.S.C. § 1341 from enjoining the collection of state taxes when a plain, speedy, and efficient remedy is available in state courts.
• Howell v. Thomas
  566 F.2d 469· 5th Cir.· 1978-01-16
  The court held that the appellant's contentions were insufficient to justify relief in federal court, affirming the denial of his petition.
• Meadows v. A. M. (Slim) Gabrel
  563 F.2d 1231· 5th Cir.· 1977-12-01
  The court held that the district court erred in dismissing the Section 1983 claims solely on the grounds that they fell within the core of habeas corpus.
• McCRAY v. Sullivan
  559 F.2d 292· 5th Cir.· 1977-09-16
• Piatt v. Louisville & Jefferson Cnty. Bd. OF Educ.
  556 F.2d 809· 6th Cir.· 1977-06-10
  The court held that the district judge did not abuse his discretion in refusing to convene a three-judge court and did not err in abstaining from the equal protection issue, affirming the dismissal of the action.
• James v. Rodriguez
  553 F.2d 59· 10th Cir.· 1977-04-12
  The court held that the tactical filing of a habitual criminal charge after an appeal and reversal of a conviction, without justification, constitutes a violation of the due process clause.
• Davis v. Benny Fisher
  546 F.2d 66· 5th Cir.· 1977-01-26
  The court held that a prisoner's pro se claim of unpaid labor sufficiently states a constitutional claim, while denial of counsel requires habeas corpus and exhaustion of state remedies.
• Dolack v. Allenbrand
  548 F.2d 891· 10th Cir.· 1977-01-24
  Federal courts should not interfere with ongoing state criminal prosecutions absent 'special circumstances' due to principles of comity and respect for state functions.
• Baker v. Wyrick
  547 F.2d 428· 8th Cir.· 1977-01-10
  The court affirmed the district court's dismissal of the habeas corpus petition, finding that the appellant had not properly exhausted state remedies for his jury selection claim.
• Meeks v. Jago
  548 F.2d 134· 6th Cir.· 1976-12-30
  The Sixth Circuit affirmed the district court's denial of habeas corpus, finding that the appellant had not exhausted state remedies for most claims and that the remaining claims did not present substantial constitutional questions.
• Bud Dallas Horton, Jr. v. State OF Ala.
  540 F.2d 208· 5th Cir.· 1976-10-07
  The court held that federal habeas corpus relief requires exhaustion of state remedies, and claims not presented to state courts must be dismissed without prejudice.
• Tyler v. Wyrick
  540 F.2d 921· 8th Cir.· 1976-08-09
  The court held that the petitioner's claims are frivolous, thus denying his request for appointed counsel and dismissing the appeal.
• Brown v. Estelle
  536 F.2d 1037· 5th Cir.· 1976-08-09
  The court held that a factual determination on compulsion is essential for a constitutional violation claim regarding trial in prison apparel.
• Gilbert v. Ward E. Murphy
  536 F.2d 1023· 1st Cir.· 1976-07-23
  The court held that the petitioner has not exhausted available state remedies and that pursuing those remedies is not futile.
• Sheppard v. Hutto
  535 F.2d 449· 8th Cir.· 1976-05-11
  The court held that the district court's findings regarding ineffective assistance of counsel, violation of confrontation rights, and self-incrimination were correct, affirming the denial of the habeas corpus application.
• United States ex rel. Mark Frasier v. Casscles
  531 F.2d 645· 2d Cir.· 1976-02-18
  The court held that the denial of youthful offender treatment did not violate due process, as the state court had discretion and no full adversary hearing was constitutionally required.
• Dinkins v. State OF Ala.
  526 F.2d 1268· 5th Cir.· 1976-02-13
  The court held that there was no arguable merit to the appeal and affirmed the district court's denial of habeas corpus relief.
• Walker v. Estelle
  525 F.2d 648· 5th Cir.· 1976-01-02
  The court affirmed the dismissal of some claims but remanded others for a determination of state remedy exhaustion.
• Arlice Huffman v. Estelle
  524 F.2d 926· 5th Cir.· 1975-12-12
  The court held that the district court misapprehended the issue by focusing on the enhancement statute when the claim was about the introduction of an invalid prior conviction during the punishment phase of a bifurcated trial. The court vacated and remanded for further proceeding
• Dorsey v. Warden, S. Mich. State Prison
  523 F.2d 590· 6th Cir.· 1975-10-17
  The Sixth Circuit held that the petitioner's confrontation clause rights were not violated, but remanded for an evidentiary hearing on due process claims regarding an impartial judge and suppression of evidence.
• GEE v. Dir., Patuxent Inst.
  513 F.2d 814· 4th Cir.· 1975-04-14
  The court held that the petitioner had exhausted his state remedies because the state post-conviction procedure act would not entertain his claims.