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

• Young v. Armontrout
  795 F.2d 55· 8th Cir.· 1986-07-08 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court erred in dismissing the habeas corpus petition without an evidentiary hearing, as the allegations could state a claim under the Eighth Amendment for deliberate indifference to serious medical needs.
• Smart v. Scully
  787 F.2d 816· 2d Cir.· 1986-04-07 ·cited 2×
  The Court of Appeals held that the appellant's failure to include sworn allegations in his pro se motion to withdraw his guilty plea did not constitute a procedural default under Wainwright v. Sykes, as the state had no substantial interest in denying him the opportunity to reple
• Moore v. O.L. McCOTTER
  781 F.2d 1089· 5th Cir.· 1986-02-03 ·cited 2×
  The court held that under Texas law, a state district court had valid jurisdiction to indict and convict a former juvenile after he reached adulthood, even if the offense was committed as a juvenile and juvenile proceedings were initiated, thus the enhanced sentence was valid.
• Thomas v. Auger
  738 F.2d 936· 8th Cir.· 1984-07-11 ·cited 2×
  A state prisoner is barred from federal habeas review of a constitutional claim if the claim was procedurally defaulted in state court, absent a showing of cause and prejudice for the default.
• Flowers v. Wyrick
  732 F.2d 659· 8th Cir.· 1984-04-25 ·cited 2×
  The court affirmed the denial of federal habeas corpus relief, holding that the petitioner's guilty plea was voluntary and knowing, and that jurisdictional and coercion claims were waived or unsupported.
• Narcisse v. Maggio
  725 F.2d 969· 5th Cir.· 1984-02-06 ·cited 2×
  The court granted the application for a certificate of probable cause and stay of execution, remanding the case for an evidentiary hearing on claims of ineffective assistance of counsel.
• Resendez v. McKASKLE
  722 F.2d 227· 5th Cir.· 1984-01-12 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court erred in dismissing the habeas petition for failure to exhaust state remedies without indicating judicial notice of relevant briefs and erred in dismissing for abuse of the writ without affording the petitioner an opportunity to respond.
• Donnie Long v. McKEEN
  722 F.2d 286· 6th Cir.· 1983-11-16 ·cited 2×
  The court held that a petitioner's claim of ineffective assistance of counsel due to failure to object to jury instructions does not constitute sufficient 'cause' to overcome a procedural default under Wainwright v. Sykes.
• Sherwood v. Honorable Wendell H. Tomkins
  716 F.2d 632· 9th Cir.· 1983-09-20 ·cited 2×
  The federal court dismissed the petition for a writ of habeas corpus because the petitioner failed to exhaust his state remedies, as his state appeal was still pending.
• Hilary Davis v. Page
  714 F.2d 512· 5th Cir.· 1983-09-15 ·cited 2×·via Federal Habeas Corpus Jurisdiction
  The court held that the plaintiff's claim against the state judges for declaratory and injunctive relief never presented a case or controversy because the underlying dependency proceeding had concluded, rendering the claim moot.
• Runnels v. Hess
  713 F.2d 596· 10th Cir.· 1983-07-29 ·cited 2×·via Federal Habeas Corpus Relief
  The court should find cause for the procedural default and grant relief, as the circumstances demonstrate a fundamental miscarriage of justice.
• Leiterman v. Rushen
  704 F.2d 442· 9th Cir.· 1983-04-19 ·cited 2×
  Federal habeas corpus relief is not available for excessive police violence if it did not causally contribute to the conviction.
• Bailey v. Duckworth
  699 F.2d 424· 7th Cir.· 1983-02-14 ·cited 2×
  The state appellate court's decision to grant a petition for rehearing on an issue not previously raised or argued denied the petitioner a full and fair opportunity to litigate that claim.
• Ramirez v. Estelle
  678 F.2d 604· 5th Cir.· 1982-06-18 ·cited 2×·via Federal Habeas Corpus Relief
  The court held that the petitioner waived his constitutional claim by failing to move for a continuance, and the absence of the witness's testimony did not result in prejudice.
• Gentric Hicks v. Scurr
  671 F.2d 255· 8th Cir.· 1982-02-05 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the admission of potentially misleading fingerprint probability testimony, while erroneous, did not rise to the level of a due process violation requiring federal habeas corpus relief, especially given the other evidence presented.
• Douglas v. Long
  661 F.2d 747· 9th Cir.· 1981-11-16 ·cited 2×
  The concurring judge agrees with the majority's outcome because the issue is state procedure without federal constitutional implications or demonstrated prejudice.
• Durham v. Wyrick
  665 F.2d 185· 8th Cir.· 1981-05-20 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the denial of habeas corpus relief on the grounds of using pardoned convictions and grand jury issues was appropriate, but remanded for consideration of the claim that prior convictions used for enhancement were uncounseled.
• Jones v. Purvis
  646 F.2d 127· 4th Cir.· 1981-04-07 ·cited 2×·via Federal Habeas Corpus Relief
  The court held that the sentence imposed was not so disproportionate as to constitute cruel and unusual punishment under the Eighth Amendment.
• Mitchell v. Superior Court FOR the Cnty. OF Santa Clara
  632 F.2d 767· 9th Cir.· 1980-10-07 ·cited 2×
  A guilty plea does not forfeit the right to federal habeas corpus review of pre-plea constitutional violations if state law permits such an appeal.
• Shea v. Heggie
  624 F.2d 175· 10th Cir.· 1980-06-30 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the exhaustion requirement of 28 U.S.C. § 2254(b) does not apply when there is no available state corrective process for parole denials.
• Rice v. Parratt
  605 F.2d 1091· 8th Cir.· 1979-10-03 ·cited 2×
  The court held that a second federal habeas corpus petition raising issues not previously presented to state courts must first exhaust those state remedies, even if the appellant claims they are ineffective.
• Devore v. Blackburn
  584 F.2d 52· 5th Cir.· 1978-11-02 ·cited 2×
• Reddy v. Jones
  572 F.2d 979· 4th Cir.· 1977-11-03 ·cited 2×·via Federal Habeas Corpus Relief
  The court, in dissent, argues that the denial of rehearing en banc was improper because the lower court's reasoning regarding the non-disclosure of witness inducements and exculpatory statements violated due process principles.
• Johnson v. Riddle
  562 F.2d 312· 4th Cir.· 1977-09-16 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the petitioner's claims regarding grand jury selection, denial of appeal, and ineffective assistance of counsel were waived due to an unjustified and prejudicial delay in raising them. The court also held that the show-up identification procedure, while not fa
• Algeroy A. Rozell v. Estelle
  554 F.2d 229· 5th Cir.· 1977-06-20 ·cited 2×
  The court held that a state's evidentiary rule prohibiting inquiry into a rape victim's prior sexual acts does not violate the Sixth Amendment right to confrontation when the inquiry would raise collateral issues and confuse the jury.
• Johnie Stocker, Jr. v. Hutto
  547 F.2d 437· 8th Cir.· 1977-01-14 ·cited 2×
  Federal courts will not grant habeas corpus relief on Fourth Amendment claims if the state provided a full and fair opportunity to litigate those claims.
• Smith v. Colman
  528 F.2d 1362· 5th Cir.· 1976-03-22 ·cited 2×
  The court held that a violation of a state speedy trial rule does not, by itself, constitute a denial of the federal constitutional right to a speedy trial, which is cognizable in federal habeas corpus.
• Burge v. Estelle
  496 F.2d 1177· 5th Cir.· 1974-07-05 ·cited 2×
  The court held that a spouse's voluntary consent validates a warrantless search under federal constitutional standards, regardless of stricter state law in the jurisdiction where the search occurred.
• van Geldern v. Field
  498 F.2d 400· 9th Cir.· 1974-05-29 ·cited 2×·via Federal Habeas Corpus Jurisdiction
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the habeas corpus petition based on the concurrent sentence doctrine, as the petitioner failed to demonstrate significant prejudice from the challenged conviction.
• Ross v. Craven
  478 F.2d 240· 9th Cir.· 1973-05-04 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the federal district court erred in dismissing the habeas petition for failure to exhaust state remedies, as the California Supreme Court had denied the petition on the merits.
• Kirby v. Beto
  472 F.2d 167· 5th Cir.· 1973-01-16 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the federal habeas corpus petition should have been dismissed for failure to exhaust state remedies, not on the merits.
• Brookins v. State
  461 F.2d 663· 5th Cir.· 1972-06-19 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the petitioner failed to exhaust state remedies by not presenting his claim to the state appellate courts.
• United States ex rel. Eugene H. Kidd v. Commonwealth OF Pa. & Dist. Attorney of Philadelphia Cnty.
  453 F.2d 247· 3d Cir.· 1971-12-29 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the prisoner's claims of incompetent counsel and an invalid guilty plea lacked merit, and affirmed the denial of habeas corpus relief.
• Wilwording v. Swenson
  446 F.2d 553· 8th Cir.· 1971-08-02 ·cited 2×
  The court held that a prior denial of a habeas corpus petition on the merits is controlling if the same ground is presented and the ends of justice would not be served by reaching the merits again.
• Application of Lyle Nelson for a Writ of Habeas Corpus
  445 F.2d 631· 8th Cir.· 1971-07-01 ·cited 2×
  The court vacated its prior judgment and remanded the case to the district court for fact-finding on an issue raised by the Solicitor General.
• United States ex rel. Warren E. Cronan v. Hon. Vincent R. Mancusi
  444 F.2d 51· 2d Cir.· 1971-06-11 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the petitioner's confessions were voluntary and that the state proceedings adequately determined their voluntariness, thus denying the petition for a writ of habeas corpus.
• Basil H. Rutter v. Wright
  439 F.2d 1002· 6th Cir.· 1971-03-31 ·cited 2×
  A petitioner must exhaust state remedies under the Tennessee Post-Conviction Procedure Act of 1967 before seeking federal habeas corpus relief, as the Act provides an available remedy for challenging convictions.
• Lake v. Hale
  440 F.2d 1191· 5th Cir.· 1971-03-15 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court erred in denying habeas relief for the assault conviction without an adequate record and may need to conduct an evidentiary hearing.
• United States v. Manley
  437 F.2d 1250· 10th Cir.· 1971-02-19 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the totality of the evidence was sufficient to sustain the perjury conviction and that the denial of the motion for grand jury records was proper.
• Flanagan v. Beto
  437 F.2d 895· 5th Cir.· 1971-01-25 ·cited 2×
  Federal habeas courts do not review state court evidentiary rulings unless a constitutional right was violated.
• McTYRE v. Pearson
  435 F.2d 333· 8th Cir.· 1970-12-17 ·cited 2×·via Federal Habeas Corpus Jurisdiction
  The court affirmed the dismissal of the petitioner's federal petition without prejudice, finding it premature and that state courts should have the first opportunity to address the speedy trial issue.
• Bradford Robert Hull v. Swenson
  431 F.2d 1194· 8th Cir.· 1970-09-28 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying the habeas corpus petition, as the petitioner's claims regarding the denial of counsel and the involuntariness of his confession lacked merit.
• Jones v. Craven
  428 F.2d 478· 9th Cir.· 1970-06-23 ·cited 2×
  A state prisoner must exhaust available state remedies before seeking federal habeas corpus relief.
• Anaya v. Baker
  427 F.2d 73· 10th Cir.· 1970-05-25 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the trial court's restrictive 'pauper' standard for appointing counsel was unconstitutional and did not conform to federal mandate.
• Allen v. Ciccone
  425 F.2d 989· 8th Cir.· 1970-05-01 ·cited 2×·via Federal Habeas Corpus Relief
  A federal sentence deferred until the expiration of a state sentence begins to run when the prisoner is released from state custody and taken into federal custody, even if the state sentence has not technically expired.
• Schram v. Hoyt C. Cupp
  425 F.2d 612· 9th Cir.· 1970-04-17 ·cited 2×
  The dissenting judge would affirm the trial court's finding that the appellant failed to meet the burden of proving an inadequate waiver of counsel.
• Wilhelmi v. Beto
  426 F.2d 795· 5th Cir.· 1970-03-19 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying the habeas corpus petition, as the issues raised did not present a federal constitutional question or were properly resolved.
• Bennie Earnest Wilson v. Beto
  415 F.2d 774· 5th Cir.· 1969-08-19 ·cited 2×
• Haney v. Nelson
  414 F.2d 801· 9th Cir.· 1969-07-22 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the petitioner's claims do not raise a federal question and that his statements were admissible under the law at the time of his conviction.
• Frazier v. Langlois
  412 F.2d 766· 1st Cir.· 1969-03-20 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the petitioner had not exhausted his state court remedies for the issues raised in his habeas corpus petition.