Habeas Corpus Petition

4,117 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 4,089 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• Smith v. A.L. Lockhart
  697 F.2d 267· 8th Cir.· 1983-01-12 ·cited 2×
• Davidson v. Louie L. Wainwright
  436 So. 2d 134· Fla. 4th DCA· 1983-01-12 ·cited 2×·via Writ Of Habeas Corpus
  Martha Davidson seeks habeas corpus to obtain delayed appellate review after her public defender failed to file a timely notice of appeal. The court granted the petition, allowing delayed appeal proceedings, while certifying important questions to the Florida Supreme Court regard
• Lacy v. A.L. Lockhart
  697 F.2d 271· 8th Cir.· 1983-01-12 ·cited 2×·via Habeas Corpus Relief
  The court affirmed the district court's denial of the habeas corpus petition, finding no constitutional violations regarding incriminating statements, in-court identification, sufficiency of evidence, or ineffective assistance of counsel.
• Abramson v. Griffin
  693 F.2d 1009· 10th Cir.· 1982-12-01 ·cited 2×·via Writ Of Habeas Corpus
  The court held that collateral estoppel, as an integral part of the Double Jeopardy Clause, barred the state from relitigating the issue of the defendant's identity as the driver, which had been determined in his favor in prior municipal court proceedings.
• Sodders v. Parratt
  693 F.2d 811· 8th Cir.· 1982-12-01 ·cited 2×
  A voluntary guilty plea waives claims regarding the sufficiency of the information, and a criminal statute is constitutional as applied if it clearly applies to the defendant's conduct.
• Jones v. Weldon
  690 F.2d 835· 11th Cir.· 1982-11-01 ·cited 2×
  The court held that a prosecutor's refusal to stipulate to the admissibility of polygraph evidence does not violate a defendant's constitutional rights when the state rule merely allows parties to waive objection to inadmissible evidence, rather than creating a substantive right
• Ortiz v. Duckworth
  692 F.2d 39· 7th Cir.· 1982-10-28 ·cited 2×
  The court concurred in the result because defense counsel failed to object to the jury charge, despite the charge being potentially prejudicial.
• Zeigler v. Louie L. Wainwright
  421 So. 2d 1· Fla.· 1982-10-18 ·cited 2×·via Writ Of Habeas Corpus
  The court denied the petition for a writ of habeas corpus and the application for a stay of execution.
• Shufty v. State
  419 So. 2d 1171· Fla. 2d DCA· 1982-10-01 ·cited 2×
• Fletcher Shaw v. Estelle
  686 F.2d 273· 5th Cir.· 1982-09-20 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the inadvertent use of the wrong heroin packet at trial, without prosecution knowledge or material impact, did not violate due process or fundamental fairness, and thus did not warrant habeas relief.
• Ellison v. DE LA Rosa
  685 F.2d 959· 5th Cir.· 1982-09-13 ·cited 2×·via Habeas Corpus Relief
  The court held that a section 1983 action against appointed counsel for ineffective assistance of counsel fails because such counsel does not act under color of state law.
• Bryant v. Cherry
  687 F.2d 48· 4th Cir.· 1982-09-10 ·cited 2×
  A guilty plea remains voluntary and intelligent even if the trial court fails to inform the defendant of a mandatory minimum sentence, if the defendant was aware of the plea agreement and reasonably expected a sentence at or above the mandatory minimum.
• In re the Application of Kenneth Bergen v. Carson
  417 So. 2d 1081· Fla. 1st DCA· 1982-08-06 ·cited 2×·via Writ Of Habeas Corpus
  Kenneth Bergen appealed the denial of his habeas corpus petition, claiming he was entitled to discharge under 18 U.S.C. § 3182 because thirty days had elapsed since his arrest on a fugitive warrant. The Florida District Court of Appeal affirmed the denial, holding that the thirty
• Denard v. Louie L. Wainwright
  418 So. 2d 280· Fla. 5th DCA· 1982-06-30 ·cited 2×·via Writ Of Habeas Corpus
  Petitioner Denard sought habeas corpus relief after his direct appeal was dismissed for untimely filing, arguing he was deprived of his right to appeal by state action. The court held that under Baggett v. Wainwright, the defendant bears the initial responsibility to timely notif
• Preston v. Seay
  684 F.2d 172· 1st Cir.· 1982-06-29 ·cited 2×
  The court affirmed the denial of the habeas corpus petition, holding that the petitioner's 'solid default' constituted a waiver of his right to a jury trial under the challenged statute.
• Brown v. Warden, Great Meadow Correctional Facility
  682 F.2d 348· 2d Cir.· 1982-06-23 ·cited 2×
  The court held that New York's requirement for the prosecution to prove a defendant's mental competency to stand trial by a preponderance of the evidence satisfies due process.
• Ignatizo Giuliano v. Louie Wainwright
  416 So. 2d 1180· Fla. 4th DCA· 1982-06-23 ·cited 2×·via Writ Of Habeas Corpus
  Petitioner Giuliano sought habeas corpus relief claiming his appellate conviction was infirm because Judge Glickstein, who sat on the appellate panel affirming his conviction in one case, had previously represented a prosecution witness in a separate trial. The court denied the p
• Soto v. State
  409 So. 2d 1123· Fla. 3d DCA· 1982-02-09 ·cited 2×·via Writ Of Habeas Corpus
  Rogelio Soto challenges an extradition order to Virginia on habeas corpus grounds, arguing the Virginia indictment failed to allege he committed an act in Florida that resulted in a crime in Virginia, as required by Florida's extradition statute. The court reverses and grants the
• 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.
• Fla. Parole & Prob. Comm'n v. August Alby
  400 So. 2d 864· Fla. 4th DCA· 1981-07-15 ·cited 2×·via Writ Of Habeas Corpus
  The court held that the trial court erred in granting the writ of habeas corpus but correctly denied the motion for writ of prohibition.
• Middleton v. Polk
  399 So. 2d 1105· Fla. 5th DCA· 1981-06-24 ·cited 2×·via Writ Of Habeas Corpus
  A defendant convicted by jury but with adjudication withheld sought habeas corpus relief after bail was revoked for violating a condition requiring him to reside with his father. The Florida appellate court denied the petition, holding that such residency conditions are reasonabl
• White v. Wyrick
  651 F.2d 597· 8th Cir.· 1981-06-17 ·cited 2×·via Writ Of Habeas Corpus
  A federal court properly denied a habeas corpus petition where the petitioner failed to exhaust available state remedies for most of his claims.
• Sacco v. Falke
  649 F.2d 634· 8th Cir.· 1981-06-03 ·cited 2×
  The court affirmed the denial of habeas corpus, finding that the petitioner had not exhausted state remedies for the Ohio indictment and that claims regarding the detainer's effects were moot.
• Koski v. Unwar J. Samaha
  648 F.2d 790· 1st Cir.· 1981-05-20 ·cited 2×
  A prosecutor's mere recommendation or threat to recommend a higher sentence in a de novo trial does not constitute prosecutorial vindictiveness violating due process, especially when the defendant proceeds with the trial and the judge ultimately imposes the sentence.
• Sperl v. Deukmejian
  642 F.2d 1154· 9th Cir.· 1981-03-23 ·cited 2×·via Habeas Corpus Relief
  The court held that declaratory relief is unavailable to attack a state criminal conviction and that collateral estoppel bars reconsideration of issues already decided in state habeas corpus proceedings.
• United States v. Luck
  664 F.2d 311· D.C. Cir.· 1981-02-17 ·cited 2×
  The court held that extending a federal sentence to account for time spent out of custody due to escape does not require a hearing, as it is a clerical adjustment, not a punitive forfeiture of good time credits.
• MAY v. Wyrick
  635 F.2d 760· 8th Cir.· 1981-01-15 ·cited 2×·via Writ Of Habeas Corpus
  The court affirmed the district court's denial of the habeas corpus application.
• Tully v. Scheu
  637 F.2d 917· 3d Cir.· 1980-12-30 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the state afforded the defendant a meaningful sentence reduction hearing as required by prior mandate, and thus the district court erred in granting habeas corpus relief.
• United States ex rel. Curtis Houston v. Warden, Stateville Corr. Ctr., & Ill. Prisoner Review Bd.
  635 F.2d 656· 7th Cir.· 1980-12-16 ·cited 2×
  A prisoner serving a determinate sentence is not entitled to greater due process safeguards than those afforded to a prisoner serving an indeterminate sentence before being deprived of good-time credit.
• Johnson v. Estelle
  625 F.2d 75· 5th Cir.· 1980-08-29 ·cited 2×
  Habeas corpus relief should be governed by substance over form, and the petitioner's actions indicated they considered the removal proceedings abandoned.
• United States ex rel. John Sullivan v. Cuyler
  631 F.2d 14· 3d Cir.· 1980-08-19 ·cited 2×
  The court remanded the case to the district court for reconsideration of the sufficiency of evidence under the Jackson standard and the issue of actual conflict of interest affecting counsel's performance.
• Satterlee v. Kritzman
  626 F.2d 682· 9th Cir.· 1980-08-15 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the clerk's eight-month delay in forwarding the district court file did not violate Satterlee's constitutional rights because he lost no substantive rights as a result of the delay.
• Smith v. Hambrick
  637 F.2d 211· 4th Cir.· 1980-08-04 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the Parole Commission sufficiently identified the factor preventing the inmate's release and did not act arbitrarily or capriciously in denying parole.
• Willis v. Garrison
  624 F.2d 491· 4th Cir.· 1980-07-01 ·cited 2×·via Habeas Corpus Relief
  The court held that a pre-trial identification procedure, even if suggestive, is permissible if the identification is reliable under the totality of the circumstances, and that the identification in this case met that standard.
• Shea v. Heggie
  624 F.2d 175· 10th Cir.· 1980-06-30 ·cited 2×·via Writ Of Habeas Corpus
  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.
• F. S. N. v. Joyce
  384 So. 2d 720· Fla. 4th DCA· 1980-06-04 ·cited 2×·via Writ Of Habeas Corpus
  A juvenile petitioner challenged his prosecution as an adult for a burglary charge after voluntarily requesting adult trial status for a prior petit theft charge. The court held that statutory provisions allowing continued adult prosecution of juveniles apply only to transfers ef
• Meggs v. Fair
  621 F.2d 460· 1st Cir.· 1980-05-12 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the petitioner failed to exhaust state remedies for some claims and that the remaining claims did not rise to the level of constitutional error warranting habeas corpus relief.
• COX v. Hutto
  619 F.2d 731· 8th Cir.· 1980-04-16 ·cited 2×·via Writ Of Habeas Corpus
  The court held that the State failed to prove Cox was not prejudiced by a defective stipulation of prior convictions, thus affirming the grant of habeas corpus relief.
• Chaudoin v. State
  383 So. 2d 645· Fla. 5th DCA· 1980-03-12 ·cited 2×·via Writ Of Habeas Corpus
  Russell Chaudoin sought post-conviction relief under Rule 3.850, claiming his court-appointed attorney was ineffective for filing a notice of appeal before the trial court ruled on a motion for new trial, thereby waiving his right to appeal the sufficiency of the evidence. The Fi
• Cole v. Wyrick
  615 F.2d 1206· 8th Cir.· 1980-02-26 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the petitioner's consecutive sentences were imposed based on a statute later found unconstitutional, and thus the matter should be remanded for resentencing.
• Foster v. Barbour
  613 F.2d 59· 4th Cir.· 1980-01-14 ·cited 2×
  The court affirmed the grant of a writ of habeas corpus, finding that the prosecutor's repeated cross-examination of the defendant about unconvicted crimes denied him due process. However, the court disagreed with the district court's sentencing conclusions regarding the ex post
• Sanders v. Oliver
  611 F.2d 804· 10th Cir.· 1979-12-20 ·cited 2×·via Petition For Habeas Corpus Relief
• Pinnon v. Ciccone
  611 F.2d 252· 8th Cir.· 1979-12-20 ·cited 2×·via Habeas Corpus Relief
  The court held that the issues raised by the petitioner became moot due to a subsequent parole hearing, and his allegations did not state sufficient facts for relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2255.
• Kibert v. Blankenship
  611 F.2d 520· 4th Cir.· 1979-12-04 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court erred in granting habeas corpus relief, as the petitioner's guilty plea was voluntary and knowingly entered, and he was not denied effective assistance of counsel.
• Makris v. United States Bureau OF Prisons
  606 F.2d 575· 5th Cir.· 1979-11-14 ·cited 2×
  The court held that procedural due process rights do not apply to the classification of an inmate as a Central Monitoring Case (CMC).
• Antonelli v. Ralston
  609 F.2d 340· 8th Cir.· 1979-11-01 ·cited 2×·via Application For Writ Of Habeas Corpus
  The court held that the district court should have stayed proceedings to allow prisoners to seek administrative relief before denying their petition for injunctive relief.
• Tully v. Scheu
  607 F.2d 31· 3d Cir.· 1979-09-26 ·cited 2×·via Habeas Corpus Relief
  The court held that denying a defendant a hearing on a timely motion for sentence reduction due to court rule time limits, after the hearing was adjourned to obtain substitute counsel, violates the constitutional right to counsel at a critical stage of the proceeding.
• Elliott v. Thompson
  599 F.2d 767· 6th Cir.· 1979-06-11 ·cited 2×·via Writ Of Habeas Corpus
  The court affirmed the district court's denial of the habeas corpus petition, finding the confession voluntary and any Bruton Rule violation to be harmless error.
• Fulford v. Blackburn
  593 F.2d 17· 5th Cir.· 1979-04-16 ·cited 2×
  The court held that a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel based on a plea agreement for an unauthorized sentence is not established without showing prejudice.