Exhaustion Of State Remedies

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

• Herring v. Rodriguez
  372 F.2d 470· 10th Cir.· 1967-02-08
  The court held that the dismissal of the federal habeas corpus petition without prejudice was not erroneous because the appellant had failed to exhaust his available state remedies.
• Petition of Leo Robert Forcella for a Writ of Habeas Corpus
  371 F.2d 37· 3d Cir.· 1967-01-17
  The court held that the defendant was denied due process due to prejudicial statements made during voir dire and his exclusion from a chambers conference.
• Adargo v. Patterson
  371 F.2d 822· 10th Cir.· 1967-01-13
  The court held that the appellant had not exhausted his state remedies because the Colorado Supreme Court had not yet finally determined his writ of error concerning his original conviction.
• Kirkland v. Maxwell
  369 F.2d 687· 6th Cir.· 1966-12-14
  The court held that the appellant had not exhausted his state remedies regarding his Sixth Amendment confrontation claim and that his other claims were too vague or unsubstantiated to warrant federal court intervention.
• United States ex rel. James W. Harbold v. Myers
  367 F.2d 53· 3d Cir.· 1966-10-06
  The court held that handcuffing a defendant for one day based on counsel's concerns about instability and escape does not violate due process, and that a claim regarding the voluntary withdrawal of post-trial motions was not exhausted in state court.
• Jack v. Rhay
  366 F.2d 191· 9th Cir.· 1966-09-14
  The appellate court affirmed the district court's denial of the habeas corpus petition, finding the petitioner's claims regarding unlawful arrest, search, and limited jury argument time to be without merit.
• Delgado v. Narciso Galarza Cruz
  363 F.2d 430· 1st Cir.· 1966-07-08
  The court held that the district court erred in granting habeas corpus relief based on Escobedo and Jackson v. Denno, as the petitioner's claims were either inapplicable, not properly exhausted, or not adequately proven.
• Carroll v. Crouse
  361 F.2d 903· 10th Cir.· 1966-06-07
  The court held that the appellant had not exhausted his state remedies, making his federal habeas corpus petition premature.
• Holman v. Lawhon
  362 F.2d 1· 5th Cir.· 1966-05-23
  The court held that the district court erred in granting habeas corpus relief because the petitioner failed to demonstrate that the exclusion of the witness's testimony caused prejudice or injury.
• Walton v. Peyton
  360 F.2d 935· 4th Cir.· 1966-05-10
  The court held that a state court transcript, though not formally certified, is admissible in federal court if its accuracy is guaranteed by the attorneys involved and not disputed.
• Clark v. Crouse
  359 F.2d 785· 10th Cir.· 1966-04-26
  The court held that while state remedies may not be fully exhausted, their effectiveness must be considered, potentially entitling the petitioner to a federal evidentiary hearing.
• Rogers Merritt v. State
  359 F.2d 793· 5th Cir.· 1966-04-06
  The court held that the district court should reconsider the habeas corpus petition, particularly regarding the exhaustion of state remedies and the potential claim of illegal search and seizure.
• United States ex rel. Luther C. Williams v. Hedrick
  356 F.2d 430· 7th Cir.· 1966-02-24
  A federal court need not require a petitioner to litigate a disavowed issue in state court as a prerequisite for federal habeas corpus relief.
• Gordon v. Crouse
  357 F.2d 174· 10th Cir.· 1966-02-21
  The court held that the district court properly denied federal habeas relief because the appellant had not exhausted his state court remedies when the federal court acted.
• Reay v. Turner
  356 F.2d 418· 10th Cir.· 1966-02-04
  The court held that the petitioner had not exhausted his state remedies, and his petition for habeas corpus was therefore properly denied.
• United States ex rel. Robert G. Antczak v. Superintendent, Downey Veterans Admin. Hosp., N. Chicago, Ill.
  354 F.2d 635· 7th Cir.· 1965-12-29
  The court held that a federal court lacks jurisdiction to issue a writ of habeas corpus when state remedies for challenging a commitment have not been exhausted, even if the person is held in a federal facility.
• United States ex rel. John J. Bower v. Banmiller
  353 F.2d 85· 3d Cir.· 1965-11-12
  The court held that the relator had not exhausted his state remedies regarding the issues raised on appeal.
• Lacklineo v. Tahash
  351 F.2d 58· 8th Cir.· 1965-10-06
  The court held that the district court erred in denying an evidentiary hearing on the appellant's claim that his guilty plea was induced by a promise of probation, as this issue was not decided on its merits by the state courts.
• Nelson v. Sandritter
  351 F.2d 284· 9th Cir.· 1965-09-28
  The court held that the petitioner's federal constitutional rights were not violated by the initial commitment or the denial of prior habeas corpus petitions, and that he had not exhausted state remedies.
• Delbert Chris Clark v. Turner
  350 F.2d 294· 10th Cir.· 1965-08-26
  A federal court will not review the validity of a conviction on one count if the petitioner is validly in custody under a sentence on another count.
• Thomas v. The Sheriff OF Jackson Cnty.
  346 F.2d 997· 6th Cir.· 1965-06-11
  The court held that the appellant must exhaust state remedies before seeking federal habeas corpus relief, even if he believes state courts offer no justice.
• Rhinehart v. State OF N.C.
  344 F.2d 114· 4th Cir.· 1965-03-30
  The court held that a federal district court should generally require exhaustion of state remedies before entertaining a habeas corpus petition, unless extraordinary circumstances exist.
• Watson v. Gaughan
  338 F.2d 659· 1st Cir.· 1964-11-18
  The court held that the inmate's motions for appeal, counsel, and pauper status should be denied due to an inadequate record and failure to exhaust state remedies.
• Goss v. Bomar
  337 F.2d 341· 6th Cir.· 1964-10-08
  The court affirmed the denial of the habeas corpus petition because the petitioner had not exhausted his state remedies.
• Pugh v. State OF N.C.
  336 F.2d 508· 4th Cir.· 1964-09-10
  The court held that the district court erred in denying the petition without a hearing, as the record did not fully address the voluntariness of the confession and adequacy of representation.
• Hutchins v. Dunbar
  328 F.2d 111· 9th Cir.· 1964-01-28
  The court held that the petitioner's claims were frivolous and lacked merit, thus affirming the denial of the petition for a writ of habeas corpus.
• Tompkins v. Nash
  326 F.2d 466· 8th Cir.· 1964-01-23
  The court held that the jury's verdict of 'guilty of rape' was sufficiently clear to support a conviction for forcible rape, given the charge, evidence, and jury instructions.
• United States ex rel. Ora Lee Rogers v. The Honorable James H. Davis
  323 F.2d 653· 5th Cir.· 1963-10-25
  A federal court need not require a state prisoner to repetitiously seek relief from state courts if the same federal constitutional issues have already been decided against him.
• United States ex rel. Robert L. Brown v. Commonwealth of Pa.
  323 F.2d 53· 3d Cir.· 1963-09-24
  The district court's denial of the habeas corpus petition is affirmed because the appellant has not exhausted his state remedies for the alleged alteration of his sentence expiration date.
• White v. Ward Lane
  321 F.2d 298· 7th Cir.· 1963-07-17
  The court held that the district court erred in denying habeas corpus relief, as the petitioner's indigency rendered Indiana's appellate process constitutionally deficient.
• Mezzatesta v. Anderson
  316 F.2d 157· 3d Cir.· 1963-04-15
  The court held that the case should be remanded to the District Court to reconsider the habeas corpus petition in light of the Supreme Court's decision in Fay v. Noia, which overruled prior precedent on the exhaustion of state remedies.
• United States ex rel. v. Pate
  314 F.2d 458· 7th Cir.· 1963-02-14
  The court held that the district court's denial of the habeas corpus petition was proper because the petitioner failed to demonstrate a denial of federal constitutional rights in the state court proceedings.
• Greer v. Ellis
  306 F.2d 587· 5th Cir.· 1962-07-25
  The court held that a federal district court cannot summarily deny a habeas corpus petition without a hearing or show cause order when the petition alleges constitutional violations, even if state courts previously denied relief.
• United States ex rel. Isidore Kaganovitch v. Wilkins
  305 F.2d 715· 2d Cir.· 1962-07-10
  The court held that the petitioner failed to exhaust state remedies by not seeking certiorari, and his claims were without merit.
• Gholston v. Otto C. Boles
  305 F.2d 162· 4th Cir.· 1962-06-15
  The federal court held that it is bound by the state's highest court's interpretation of a state statute, even if the issue is framed as jurisdictional.
• Whitus v. Balkcom
  299 F.2d 844· 5th Cir.· 1962-02-26
  The court held that the district court correctly dismissed the habeas corpus petition because the appellant had not exhausted his state remedies.
• United States ex rel. James Wright v. Randolph
  297 F.2d 803· 7th Cir.· 1962-01-09
  The court held that a federal court should not grant a writ of habeas corpus if the petitioner has not exhausted available state remedies.
• Holly v. Smyth
  294 F.2d 396· 4th Cir.· 1961-09-14
  The court held that the prisoner's claim regarding lack of counsel in recidivist proceedings was not exhausted in state courts and thus denied federal relief at this time.
• Javor v. Dickson
  295 F.2d 61· 9th Cir.· 1961-08-28
  The court denied the application for a certificate of probable cause.
• Coakley v. United States Dist. Court
  291 F.2d 927· 6th Cir.· 1961-06-27
  The court held that the petitioner's application for a writ of mandamus, seeking to compel a district court to hear his habeas corpus petition or to review a dismissal order, was denied.
• Anderson v. State OF Ky.
  288 F.2d 333· 6th Cir.· 1961-03-27
  The court held that a certificate of probable cause is required for an appeal in a state habeas corpus case, and denied the petitioner's motion for such a certificate.
• United States ex rel. Henry Stevens v. Wilkins
  287 F.2d 865· 2d Cir.· 1961-02-28
  The court held that the relator's petition for a writ of habeas corpus was properly denied because he failed to exhaust his state remedies, and even if he had, his claim lacked merit.
• Carroll Norwood Byrd v. Steiner
  284 F.2d 341· 4th Cir.· 1960-11-17
  The court held that the appeal must be dismissed for want of a certificate of probable cause, as the appellant had not exhausted state remedies for the issue now raised.
• Black v. Ellis
  283 F.2d 314· 5th Cir.· 1960-10-21
• Hamilton v. Buchkoe
  283 F.2d 816· 6th Cir.· 1960-10-21
  The court held that the petitioner failed to exhaust state remedies and did not obtain a certificate of probable cause, thus denying his application for appeal.
• Horton v. Joseph R. Blalock, M.D.
  282 F.2d 782· 4th Cir.· 1960-10-04
  The court held that a new claim of present sanity must first be presented to state courts before federal habeas corpus relief can be sought.
• Campbell v. Bannan
  279 F.2d 869· 6th Cir.· 1960-06-14
  The court held that the petitioner failed to exhaust state remedies and was not entitled to habeas corpus relief.
• United States ex rel. James J. Carrono v. Richmond
  279 F.2d 170· 2d Cir.· 1960-05-17
  A state prisoner seeking federal habeas corpus must exhaust state remedies, which includes obtaining a required statutory certificate for appeal from a state habeas denial, even if indigent.
• United States ex rel. Earl Richard Saunders v. Myers
  276 F.2d 790· 3d Cir.· 1960-03-21
  The court held that federal courts cannot grant habeas corpus relief to re-weigh evidence or pass on admissibility of testimony in state court proceedings, as these are matters for direct appeal.
• Savage v. Raines
  271 F.2d 751· 10th Cir.· 1959-09-26
  A federal court will entertain a habeas corpus application only after all available state remedies, including certiorari to the U.S. Supreme Court, have been exhausted.