Federal Habeas Corpus

1,464 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 119 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• Simmons v. United States
  437 F.2d 156· 5th Cir.· 1971-01-27 ·cited 10×
  28 U.S.C. § 2255 is available to a prisoner in state custody attacking a future federal sentence, and a motion raising the same core claim, even with more detail, is considered a second or successive motion.
• Denny Lee Gafford v. Warden, U. S. Penitentiary, Leavenworth, Kan., & State of Alaska
  434 F.2d 318· 10th Cir.· 1970-11-16 ·cited 10×
  The court held that an evidentiary hearing is necessary to determine whether jury misconduct occurred, as a juror's affidavit alleging consideration of outside evidence raises factual questions requiring resolution.
• Salisbury v. Grimes
  406 F.2d 50· 5th Cir.· 1969-01-14 ·cited 10×
  A white defendant cannot claim a violation of his constitutional rights based on the alleged systematic exclusion of Negro citizens from the grand jury that indicted him. Additionally, a harsher sentence imposed after a successful appeal is not unconstitutional if the trial jury
• Manual Chavez v. Baker
  399 F.2d 943· 10th Cir.· 1968-09-16 ·cited 10×
  The court affirmed the denial of the habeas corpus petition, finding the appellant's claims unsubstantial and that requiring re-presentation to state courts would not serve justice.
• Wilmer W. Evans v. Eyman
  363 F.2d 540· 9th Cir.· 1966-07-13 ·cited 10×
  A federal court must grant an evidentiary hearing in a habeas corpus proceeding when a factual dispute is presented and the merits of that dispute were not resolved in a state hearing.
• Pierce v. Page
  362 F.2d 534· 10th Cir.· 1966-06-24 ·cited 10×
  Federal habeas corpus is unavailable to review alleged errors in a state criminal trial that do not violate fundamental liberties.
• Orin W. Shultz v. State OF Neb.
  353 F.2d 81· 8th Cir.· 1965-12-06 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court correctly denied the habeas corpus petition, as the issues raised did not involve federal constitutional questions and the factual findings were supported by substantial evidence.
• Pate v. Page
  325 F.2d 567· 10th Cir.· 1963-12-18 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the petitioner's confession was voluntary and admissible, affirming the denial of his federal habeas corpus petition.
• Mattoon v. Rhay
  313 F.2d 683· 9th Cir.· 1963-02-04 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the delay in bringing the appellant to trial was not so unreasonable as to deny him due process of law or violate his Sixth Amendment right to a speedy trial.
• Collins v. Frisbie
  189 F.2d 464· 6th Cir.· 1951-05-28 ·cited 10×
  The judgment of the District Court dismissing the application should be affirmed.
• Mikel v. Thieret
  887 F.2d 733· 7th Cir.· 1989-10-04 ·cited 9×
  The court affirmed the denial of the federal habeas corpus petition, finding that Mikel's claims were either procedurally defaulted, lacked merit, or were not properly exhausted.
• Chavez v. Dareld Kerby
  848 F.2d 1101· 10th Cir.· 1988-06-08 ·cited 9×
  The admission of prior act testimony and the refusal to instruct on a lesser included offense did not violate the petitioner's constitutional rights, thus habeas corpus relief is denied.
• Brown v. Dugger
  831 F.2d 1547· 11th Cir.· 1987-11-13 ·cited 9×
  The court held that limiting cross-examination into a witness's potential deal with the state violated the Confrontation Clause and was not harmless error.
• Rosenfeld v. Dunham
  820 F.2d 52· 2d Cir.· 1987-06-01 ·cited 9×
  The court held that the state appellate court's written opinion, which considered the defendant's remaining contentions and found they did not merit reversal, indicated a review on the merits, thus allowing federal habeas review of the jury instruction claim.
• Nerison v. Solem
  715 F.2d 415· 8th Cir.· 1983-08-24 ·cited 9×
  The court held that federal habeas corpus review is barred by procedural default for claims not raised in state court, absent a showing of cause and prejudice, and that the denial of a continuance or substitution of counsel was not an abuse of discretion absent prejudice.
• Lampkins v. Gagnon
  710 F.2d 374· 7th Cir.· 1983-06-21 ·cited 9×
  The court held that Wisconsin's presumptive intent and party-to-a-crime jury instructions did not violate the defendant's constitutional rights, and affirmed the denial of habeas corpus.
• Wilkerson v. Turner
  693 F.2d 121· 11th Cir.· 1982-12-06 ·cited 9×
  The exclusion of a reliable confession, which was crucial to the defense, violated the defendant's due process rights, even if it was inadmissible hearsay under state law.
• Pierce v. Parratt
  666 F.2d 1205· 8th Cir.· 1981-12-16 ·cited 9×
  The court's holding is not explicitly stated as this is a concurring opinion reiterating a dissent. However, the concurring judge believes the Nebraska habitual criminal statute is unconstitutional.
• McKINNEY v. Estelle
  657 F.2d 740· 5th Cir.· 1981-09-30 ·cited 9×
  The court held that the prosecutor's improper argument, in the context of prior improprieties and the lack of a ruling on the objection, deprived the defendant of a fair trial.
• Pride v. Estelle
  649 F.2d 324· 5th Cir.· 1981-06-30 ·cited 9×
  The court held that post-trial evidence created a real, substantial, and legitimate doubt as to the petitioner's competency to stand trial, warranting a federal evidentiary hearing.
• Winters v. Cook
  466 F.2d 1393· 5th Cir.· 1972-09-20 ·cited 9×·via Federal Habeas Corpus Jurisdiction
  A guilty plea does not waive the right to challenge jury composition if the defendant was unaware of that right.
• Martin v. Spradley
  341 F.2d 89· 5th Cir.· 1965-01-26 ·cited 9×
  The court held that the federal district court correctly dismissed the petition for writ of habeas corpus because the petitioner had not exhausted his available state remedies.
• Clements v. State
  59 F.4th 1204· 11th Cir.· 2023-02-09 ·cited 8×
  Louis Matthew Clements appealed the dismissal of his federal habeas corpus petition, arguing that Florida's lifetime sex offender registration and reporting requirements placed him "in custody" within the meaning of 28 U.S.C. § 2254(a), thereby granting federal courts jurisdictio
• Sullivan v. Sec'y, Fla. Dep't OF Corr.
  837 F.3d 1195· 11th Cir.· 2016-09-20 ·cited 8×·via Federal Habeas Corpus Relief
  Kevin Sullivan was convicted of fleeing police, cocaine possession, and drug paraphernalia possession after his trial counsel, unaware that Florida had abolished voluntary intoxication as a defense in 1999, advised him to reject a pretrial plea offer and proceed to trial based on
• Nelson v. Secretary, Florida Dept. of Corrections
  610 F. Supp. 2d 1323· M.D. Fla.· 2009-03-26 ·cited 8×·via Federal Habeas Corpus Jurisdiction
  The Court held that the habeas petition was timely filed and that the petitioner's claims regarding the exclusion of evidence, use of privileged communications, and introduction of bad acts evidence were either not cognizable, unexhausted, procedurally barred, or without merit. F
• Remeta v. Singletary
  85 F.3d 513· 11th Cir.· 1996-05-31 ·cited 8×
  Daniel Eugene Remeta appealed the denial of his federal habeas corpus petition challenging his Florida death sentence for murder committed during a 1985 multi-state crime spree. Remeta raised numerous issues, including a claim that Florida violated the Interstate Agreement on Det
• Yohey v. Collins
  985 F.2d 222· 5th Cir.· 1993-03-08 ·cited 8×
  The court held that claims raised for the first time on appeal or in a reply brief are not considered, and that state law claims do not provide a basis for federal habeas relief unless they rise to constitutional dimension.
• Paris Hoyt Carriger v. Lewis
  948 F.2d 588· 9th Cir.· 1991-11-04 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court's orders granting summary judgment and refusing to vacate it are affirmed, while its subsequent Rule 60(b) orders are vacated for want of jurisdiction, and the second habeas petition is dismissed.
• Pitts v. A.L. Lockhart
  911 F.2d 109· 8th Cir.· 1990-08-10 ·cited 8×
  The court held that a state prisoner's claim that his conviction violates a state supreme court interpretation of a state statute is not cognizable in federal habeas corpus. It also held that the failure to instruct on a lesser included offense in a noncapital case, and the use o
• Buckley v. A.L. Lockhart
  892 F.2d 715· 8th Cir.· 1989-12-20 ·cited 8×
  The court held that a federal habeas corpus petitioner's claims are procedurally barred if not fairly presented to the state courts, and that escape from custody forfeits the right to appeal, thus precluding an ineffective assistance of counsel claim based on failure to appeal.
• Roulette Blair v. McCARTHY
  881 F.2d 602· 9th Cir.· 1989-03-27 ·cited 8×·via Federal Habeas Corpus Relief
  A habeas petitioner can obtain relief for a state trial court's violation of state law in accepting a guilty plea if the petitioner shows a reasonable probability that, but for the error, they would not have pleaded guilty.
• Clark v. O'Leary
  852 F.2d 999· 7th Cir.· 1988-07-25 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the trial court's refusal to permit cross-examination regarding the alleged bias and motive of witnesses stemming from their gang affiliation violated the Sixth Amendment's confrontation clause.
• Hartman v. W.D. Blankenship
  825 F.2d 26· 4th Cir.· 1987-08-03 ·cited 8×
  The dissenting judge holds that the district court properly found the guilty plea involuntary due to the prosecution's broken promise regarding a sentencing recommendation.
• Brasier v. Douglas
  815 F.2d 64· 10th Cir.· 1987-03-27 ·cited 8×
  The court held that procedural default did not preclude federal habeas review because the state court had addressed the merits of the petitioner's claims.
• Esquivel v. O.L. McCOTTER
  791 F.2d 350· 5th Cir.· 1986-06-07 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the Batson v. Kentucky rule should not be applied retroactively to federal habeas proceedings, and vacated the district court's stay of execution.
• Bailey v. Procunier
  744 F.2d 1166· 5th Cir.· 1984-10-29 ·cited 8×
  The court affirmed the denial of federal habeas corpus relief, finding no violation of due process from the admission of evidence regarding the victim's will, the alleged withholding of exculpatory evidence, or the jury charge.
• Parker v. Rose
  728 F.2d 392· 6th Cir.· 1984-03-02 ·cited 8×
  The Sixth Circuit held that the petitioner had not exhausted his state remedies and therefore his federal habeas corpus petition could not be considered on the merits.
• Guice v. Fortenberry
  722 F.2d 276· 5th Cir.· 1984-01-09 ·cited 8×
  The state's rebuttal evidence was sufficient to support the trial court's finding that the grand jury foreman was not selected on racial grounds.
• Alexander v. State OF Md.
  719 F.2d 1241· 4th Cir.· 1983-10-20 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the state failed to prove Alexander would have been waived to adult court in 1961, and that his petition was not barred by laches under Habeas Rule 9(a).
• Birt v. Montgomery
  709 F.2d 690· 11th Cir.· 1983-07-11 ·cited 8×
• Mahan Hollin v. Sowders
  710 F.2d 264· 6th Cir.· 1983-06-24 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the attorney's negligence did not cause demonstrable harm because the defendant's claims were considered on valid state grounds, thus no Sixth Amendment violation occurred.
• Jones v. Jago
  701 F.2d 45· 6th Cir.· 1983-02-22 ·cited 8×
  The court held that a federal court may entertain constitutional claims in a habeas corpus petition when the state appellate court addresses the merits of the claim, even if a procedural default occurred at trial.
• Siegel v. State OF NEW York & Edward J. Kuriansky
  691 F.2d 620· 2d Cir.· 1982-10-22 ·cited 8×
• Dougherty v. White
  689 F.2d 142· 8th Cir.· 1982-09-20 ·cited 8×
  The court held that a federal court's order extending probation to require restitution for offenses of which the defendant was not convicted is illegal and void.
• Early Lee Harris v. Gil Ingram
  683 F.2d 97· 4th Cir.· 1982-07-13 ·cited 8×
  A federal district court lacks jurisdiction to hear a state habeas corpus petition when the petitioner is not in the custody of that state, even if the prior state conviction affects a current federal sentence.
• Sinclair v. State OF La.
  679 F.2d 513· 5th Cir.· 1982-07-02 ·cited 8×
  The court held that a federal habeas petition can be dismissed as successive and an abuse of the writ if it raises the same claims previously decided on the merits and fails to allege new grounds for relief.
• Euell v. Wyrick
  675 F.2d 1007· 8th Cir.· 1982-04-23 ·cited 8×
  A federal habeas court may hear a jury selection claim even if not raised at trial, if state courts did not invoke their contemporaneous objection rule as a bar.
• Boyd v. Ira Mintz
  631 F.2d 247· 3d Cir.· 1980-09-29 ·cited 8×
  The court held that a breakdown in state procedure prevented the appellant from having a full and fair litigation of his Fourth Amendment claim, thus precluding federal habeas corpus relief.
• Clennon Loud v. Estelle
  556 F.2d 1326· 5th Cir.· 1977-08-05 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the petitioner did not have a constitutional right to counsel at his 1960 probation revocation hearing, and his failure to object to the use of that conviction for sentence enhancement waives federal habeas corpus review.
• Journigan v. Duffy
  552 F.2d 283· 9th Cir.· 1977-03-08 ·cited 8×
  A guilty plea does not bar federal habeas corpus relief when the petitioner has used available state habeas corpus proceedings to challenge the constitutionality of the statute under which they were convicted.