Habeas Corpus Petition

4,115 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

• WAY v. Dugger
  568 So. 2d 1263· Fla.· 1990-09-06 ·cited 16×·via Writ Of Habeas Corpus
  Fred Lewis Way was convicted of murder for killing his wife and daughter and sentenced to death. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed his conviction but vacated his death sentence due to improper jury instructions in the penalty phase that failed to inform the jury it could conside
• Savage v. Estelle
  908 F.2d 508· 9th Cir.· 1990-07-16 ·cited 16×
  A trial court may permissibly deny a criminal defendant the right to represent himself if a severe speech impediment renders him unable to abide by the rules of courtroom procedure and communicate effectively with the jury.
• Rogers-Bey v. Lane
  896 F.2d 279· 7th Cir.· 1990-02-22 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the Illinois appellate court's finding of waiver was an independent and adequate basis for decision, even though it also analyzed the issue for plain error.
• Smith v. Dugger
  565 So. 2d 1293· Fla.· 1990-02-15 ·cited 16×·via Writ Of Habeas Corpus
  Frank Lee Smith, convicted of the 1985 sexual battery and first-degree murder of an eight-year-old girl, petitioned for habeas corpus and appealed the denial of his rule 3.850 postconviction relief motion. The Florida Supreme Court reversed in part, granting a stay of execution a
• Hill v. A.L. Lockhart
  894 F.2d 1009· 8th Cir.· 1990-01-31 ·cited 16×
  The court held that erroneous parole eligibility advice given to a defendant constituted ineffective assistance of counsel, rendering the guilty plea invalid and entitling the defendant to a trial.
• Bocharski v. The Cir. Court OF the Second Jud. Cir.
  552 So. 2d 946· Fla. 1st DCA· 1989-11-08 ·cited 16×·via Writ Of Habeas Corpus
  A writ of mandamus is granted to compel the circuit court to process a habeas corpus petition without requiring a filing fee or affidavit of insolvency.
• Bliss v. A.L. Lockhart
  891 F.2d 1335· 8th Cir.· 1989-10-25 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the district court did not err in granting habeas corpus relief without an evidentiary hearing and that the petitioner's claims were not procedurally barred due to ineffective assistance of counsel and prosecutorial misconduct.
• United States v. Woods
  870 F.2d 285· 5th Cir.· 1989-04-17 ·cited 16×
  A federal prisoner's failure to demonstrate prima facie constitutional error in his guilty plea proceedings, even with a lost transcript, warrants denial of habeas corpus relief.
• King v. Lynaugh
  868 F.2d 1400· 5th Cir.· 1989-03-21 ·cited 16×
  The court, in a concurring opinion, expresses reservations about applying the contemporaneous objection rule to claims that have been revived by Supreme Court certiorari, suggesting that such claims should be reviewed on their merits.
• Harper v. Crispus NIX
  867 F.2d 455· 8th Cir.· 1989-02-03 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the petitioner failed to demonstrate sufficient cause to overcome the procedural default of his claims and that the admission of identification evidence did not result in the conviction of an actually innocent person.
• Quadrini v. Clusen
  864 F.2d 577· 7th Cir.· 1989-01-11 ·cited 16×·via Writ Of Habeas Corpus
  The court held that the petitioner's confession was voluntary and that his Sixth Amendment right to counsel had attached but was validly waived. The court affirmed the denial of the habeas corpus petition.
• Smith v. Endell
  860 F.2d 1528· 9th Cir.· 1988-11-14 ·cited 16×
  The dissenting judge would hold that the defendant's statements did not unambiguously invoke his right to counsel, and therefore the confession should not be suppressed.
• Lanigan v. Maloney
  853 F.2d 40· 1st Cir.· 1988-08-09 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the district court properly found a constitutional violation in the jury's reasonable doubt instructions and that the claim was not procedurally barred.
• Shaheed Madyun v. Young
  852 F.2d 1029· 7th Cir.· 1988-07-26 ·cited 16×·via Writ Of Habeas Corpus
• Waterhouse v. Rodriguez
  848 F.2d 375· 2d Cir.· 1988-06-03 ·cited 16×
  The court held that while the petitioner exhausted his Sixth Amendment claim, the per se rule from Solina v. United States does not apply when counsel is disbarred during a pretrial proceeding but withdraws upon learning of the disbarment and had no incentive to fear exposure fro
• Ford v. Seabold
  841 F.2d 677· 6th Cir.· 1988-03-07 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the appellant failed to establish a prima facie case for a Sixth Amendment fair-cross-section violation because young adults and college students are not distinctive groups, and the underrepresentation of women was not shown to be the result of systematic excl
• Marshall v. Lansing
  839 F.2d 933· 3d Cir.· 1988-02-10 ·cited 16×·via Writ Of Habeas Corpus
  The court held that the writ of habeas corpus was issued in error and Marshall must be returned to prison, but the majority erred in voiding the penalty for Marshall's first prison infraction.
• Jackson v. Dugger
  837 F.2d 1469· 11th Cir.· 1988-02-01 ·cited 16×
  The court held that while the petitioner's Miranda rights were not violated regarding his conviction, the jury instruction at the sentencing phase created an unconstitutional presumption of death, requiring a new sentencing hearing.
• Matthews v. Butler
  833 F.2d 1165· 5th Cir.· 1987-12-15 ·cited 16×·via Habeas Corpus Relief
  The court held that the petitioner's habeas petition was properly dismissed under Rule 9(b) for abuse of the writ, as he failed to provide a sufficient excuse for not raising the claims in a prior petition.
• McCORQUODALE v. Kemp
  829 F.2d 1035· 11th Cir.· 1987-09-20 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the petitioner failed to demonstrate an Eighth Amendment violation based on the prosecutor's remarks regarding appellate review, as the trial court provided a sufficient curative instruction. Therefore, the dismissal of the habeas corpus petition is affirmed.
• The United States v. Emmett Earl Fulford
  825 F.2d 3· 3d Cir.· 1987-08-04 ·cited 16×
  The court held that omissions from the Rule 11 colloquy were not serious enough to vacate the sentence, ineffective assistance of counsel claims failed due to lack of prejudice, and the Interstate Agreement on Detainers Act was not violated.
• Fikri Bayramoglu v. Estelle
  806 F.2d 880· 9th Cir.· 1986-12-16 ·cited 16×
  The court held that juror misconduct and bias, while serious, were harmless beyond a reasonable doubt and did not violate the defendant's constitutional right to an impartial jury.
• Schandelmeier v. Warden Richard Cunningham. Appeal of Steve Schandelmeier
  819 F.2d 52· 3d Cir.· 1986-12-02 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the petitioner had not exhausted state remedies because he failed to file a motion in state court asserting his speedy trial claim based on sentencing delay, despite available procedures.
• Prater v. U.S. Parole Comm'n & Thomas Keohane
  802 F.2d 948· 7th Cir.· 1986-10-03 ·cited 16×
• Haki Sekou v. Blackburn
  796 F.2d 108· 5th Cir.· 1986-08-06 ·cited 16×
  The Double Jeopardy Clause does not bar successive prosecutions for felony-murder and an underlying felony if the underlying felony is not the sole basis for the felony-murder prosecution, nor is it implicated by considering a crime as an aggravating circumstance during sentencin
• Russel K. Williams v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv.
  795 F.2d 738· 9th Cir.· 1986-07-24 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the appeal should be dismissed as moot because the petitioner had already departed the United States under a grant of voluntary departure and lawfully reentered, making effective relief impossible.
• In re United States Parole Comm'n
  793 F.2d 338· D.C. Cir.· 1986-06-17 ·cited 16×·via Application For Writ Of Habeas Corpus
  The District Court did not err in asserting jurisdiction over Pearson's claims for declaratory and injunctive relief, nor did it abuse its discretion in denying the Commission's motion to transfer the case.
• Evans v. O.L. McCOTTER
  790 F.2d 1232· 5th Cir.· 1986-06-04 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the petitioner failed to prove federal constitutional infirmities in his trial, affirming the dismissal of his habeas corpus petition.
• Neyland v. Blackburn
  785 F.2d 1283· 5th Cir.· 1986-03-31 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the petitioner's guilty plea and sentence enhancement were constitutionally valid, as the record demonstrated the plea was knowing and voluntary, and the enhanced sentence was based on adequate warnings and counsel's authorized admissions.
• Matusiak v. Kelly
  786 F.2d 536· 2d Cir.· 1986-03-20 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the district court erred in denying the habeas petition because the state court's acceptance of the guilty plea was not knowing and voluntary, violating due process.
• Dean v. Young
  777 F.2d 1239· 7th Cir.· 1985-11-26 ·cited 16×
  The court holds that the Wisconsin Supreme Court's finding of fact regarding the prosecutor's questioning is entitled to deference, and the jury instruction given is sufficiently different from that in Francis v. Franklin to warrant affirmance.
• United States v. Scarborough
  777 F.2d 175· 4th Cir.· 1985-11-19 ·cited 16×·via Habeas Corpus Proceedings
  The court held that the district court's findings of fact were not clearly erroneous and its determination of dangerous special offender status was not an abuse of discretion.
• United States ex rel. Paul K. Searcy v. Greer
  768 F.2d 906· 7th Cir.· 1985-07-26 ·cited 16×
  The admission of other crimes evidence, even if erroneous under state law, does not warrant federal habeas corpus relief unless it renders the trial fundamentally unfair. Denial of continuances for alibi witnesses was not an abuse of discretion given defense counsel's lack of dil
• Wiley v. Gary Rayl & the Attorney Gen. of the State of Kan.
  767 F.2d 679· 10th Cir.· 1985-07-05 ·cited 16×
  The court held that a jury instruction creating a mandatory rebuttable presumption of criminal intent unconstitutionally shifted the burden of persuasion to the defendant.
• Young v. Kemp
  760 F.2d 1097· 11th Cir.· 1985-05-03 ·cited 16×
  The Double Jeopardy Clause, as interpreted by Burks and Bullington, prevents the state from seeking the death penalty on retrial when a prior federal habeas court found insufficient evidence to support the aggravating factors for the death sentence.
• Leroy v. R.C. Marshall
  757 F.2d 94· 6th Cir.· 1985-03-21 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the 'cause and prejudice' rule of Wainwright v. Sykes applies to procedural defaults in state court, requiring a habeas petitioner to demonstrate cause and prejudice for failure to raise issues on direct appeal.
• Roach v. Warden Joseph Martin
  757 F.2d 1463· 4th Cir.· 1985-03-20 ·cited 16×
  The court affirmed the denial of the habeas corpus petition, finding that the petitioner's claims were without merit and that the state court's factfinding procedures were adequate.
• Wiggins v. Procunier
  753 F.2d 1318· 5th Cir.· 1985-02-25 ·cited 16×
  The court held that a defendant's waiver of the right to counsel was knowing and intelligent, and that a claim for denial of compulsory process was procedurally defaulted and not preserved.
• Dobard v. W.E. Johnson
  749 F.2d 1503· 11th Cir.· 1985-01-08 ·cited 16×
  The dissenting judge would reverse and remand the case to the Northern District of Alabama for a ruling on jurisdiction, arguing the district court improperly transferred the case without exercising its discretion.
• Williams v. Crispus NIX
  751 F.2d 956· 8th Cir.· 1985-01-07 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the petitioner's remaining arguments for habeas corpus relief lacked merit, affirming the denial of the petition. Procedural defaults barred consideration of certain claims, and others failed on the merits.
• United States v. Jordan
  747 F.2d 1120· 7th Cir.· 1984-10-17 ·cited 16×
  The court should have granted the writ of habeas corpus and released the petitioner unless the state trial court articulated compelling reasons for holding him to bail he could not meet.
• United States ex rel. Rueben Palmer v. DeROBERTIS
  738 F.2d 168· 7th Cir.· 1984-05-14 ·cited 16×·via Habeas Corpus Relief
  The court held that the district court correctly dismissed the habeas corpus petition because the petitioner failed to demonstrate a constitutional violation regarding the admission of flight evidence or the prosecution's use of peremptory challenges, and procedural defaults barr
• Green v. Christiansen
  732 F.2d 1397· 9th Cir.· 1984-05-08 ·cited 16×
  A prisoner erroneously released is entitled to credit for the time spent at liberty, and this claim is not subject to administrative exhaustion requirements applicable to parole matters.
• Berry v. Mintzes
  726 F.2d 1142· 6th Cir.· 1984-02-02 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the defendant's guilty plea to an open charge of murder was voluntary and knowing, despite alleged insufficiencies in the advisement of rights and consequences.
• United States v. Cockrell
  720 F.2d 1423· 5th Cir.· 1983-12-16 ·cited 16×·via Habeas Corpus Relief
  The court held that the petitioner was not deprived of his constitutional right to effective assistance of counsel, and the denial of his habeas corpus petition is affirmed.
• Burger v. Zant
  718 F.2d 979· 11th Cir.· 1983-10-13 ·cited 16×·via Habeas Corpus Relief
  The court held that a defendant is denied effective assistance of counsel when his attorney actively represents conflicting interests and fails to present mitigating evidence at sentencing, and prejudice is presumed in conflict of interest cases.
• Vardas v. W.J. Estelle, Jr.
  715 F.2d 206· 5th Cir.· 1983-09-22 ·cited 16×
  The court held that a state's failure to provide notice to defense counsel of a psychiatric examination does not violate the Sixth Amendment when the defendant has asserted an insanity defense, as this waives the right to consult counsel on the decision to undergo the examination
• Rogers v. Maggio
  714 F.2d 35· 5th Cir.· 1983-09-09 ·cited 16×
  A federal habeas petitioner is entitled to an evidentiary hearing if they did not receive a full and fair state court hearing on alleged facts entitling them to relief and the record reveals a genuine factual dispute. The court found such a dispute existed regarding ineffective a
• Daye v. Attorney Gen. OF the State OF NEW York & Eugene S. LeFevre
  712 F.2d 1566· 2d Cir.· 1983-06-27 ·cited 16×
  The dissenting judge believes the trial judge's conduct deprived the defendant of his constitutional right to a fair trial by jury.
• Davis v. Maggio
  706 F.2d 568· 5th Cir.· 1983-06-06 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the petitioner's claims were procedurally defaulted under state law and thus unreviewable in federal habeas corpus proceedings without a showing of cause and prejudice.