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

• Haas v. Abrahamson
  910 F.2d 384· 7th Cir.· 1990-08-06 ·cited 10×
  The Seventh Circuit affirmed the denial of the habeas petition, holding that Wisconsin's rule barring psychiatric opinion testimony on the issue of a defendant's capacity to form specific intent to kill is not unconstitutional.
• Robbins v. Christianson
  904 F.2d 492· 9th Cir.· 1990-05-30 ·cited 10×
• Raulerson v. United States
  901 F.2d 1009· 11th Cir.· 1990-05-21 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the government did not breach the plea agreement by opposing a sentence reduction or by failing to ensure personal appearance at all proceedings, but affirmed the district court's finding that the government breached the agreement regarding the return of the F
• Prather v. Norman
  901 F.2d 915· 11th Cir.· 1990-05-18 ·cited 10×
• Hays v. Johnson
  566 So. 2d 260· Fla. 5th DCA· 1990-04-26 ·cited 10×·via Writ Of Habeas Corpus
  A natural mother sought habeas corpus relief to obtain custody of her minor child from an attorney appointed as temporary custodian. The court denied the petition as meritless but used the occasion to sanction the mother's counsel for omitting material facts from the petition, in
• Sanders v. Sullivan
  900 F.2d 601· 2d Cir.· 1990-04-16 ·cited 10×
  The court held that while a manslaughter conviction based on recanted testimony should be overturned, convictions for robbery and weapon possession should stand due to independent corroborating evidence and the limited scope of the recantation.
• Spaziano v. Dugger
  557 So. 2d 1372· Fla.· 1990-03-15 ·cited 10×·via Writ Of Habeas Corpus
  Joseph Robert Spaziano sought a writ of habeas corpus and appealed the denial of his third motion for post-conviction relief under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850 in a death penalty case. The Florida Supreme Court, reviewing the case for the fifth time, affirmed the tria
• Kelly v. Neubert
  898 F.2d 15· 3d Cir.· 1990-03-14 ·cited 10×
  A restructuring of a sentence does not trigger the Pearce rule when the aggregate sentence is less than originally imposed and there is no evidence of vindictiveness by the sentencing court.
• Hendrix v. Lynaugh
  888 F.2d 336· 5th Cir.· 1989-11-16 ·cited 10×
  A petitioner is not considered "in custody" for purposes of a habeas corpus petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 if the sentence for the conviction being attacked has fully expired at the time the petition is filed.
• Leeroy B. Bostic, Jr. v. Carlson
  884 F.2d 1267· 9th Cir.· 1989-09-07 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court's dismissals of the habeas corpus petitions were proper because the appellant failed to demonstrate a denial of due process or present sufficient facts to support his claims.
• Spain v. Rushen
  883 F.2d 712· 9th Cir.· 1989-08-22 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the trial judge's decision to shackle the defendant was not an abuse of discretion that denied due process, considering the specific security risks and the defendant's history.
• Aleman v. United States
  878 F.2d 1009· 7th Cir.· 1989-07-10 ·cited 10×
  A district court need not hold an evidentiary hearing on a § 2255 petition if the allegations are conclusory, speculative, and lack sufficient detail or independent proof of informant status.
• Dale v. Haeberlin
  878 F.2d 930· 6th Cir.· 1989-07-03 ·cited 10×
  The court holds that the grant of habeas relief should be reversed because there was no denial of due process, despite the enhancement of Dale's punishment.
• Sampson Ellis v. A.L. Lockhart
  875 F.2d 200· 8th Cir.· 1989-05-24 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the petitioner's claim of ineffective assistance of counsel is procedurally barred due to failure to exhaust state remedies within the prescribed time limits.
• Burden v. Zant
  871 F.2d 956· 11th Cir.· 1989-04-10 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the record was inadequate to resolve the conflict of interest claim and remanded for an evidentiary hearing.
• Rushing v. Butler
  868 F.2d 800· 5th Cir.· 1989-03-30 ·cited 10×
  The introduction of victim impact evidence during the sentencing phase of a capital trial violates the Eighth Amendment by creating an impermissible risk that the death penalty will be imposed arbitrarily.
• United States ex rel. Bernard Wandick v. James A. Chrans & Neil Hartigan
  869 F.2d 1084· 7th Cir.· 1989-03-15 ·cited 10×·via Writ Of Habeas Corpus
  The court held that the petitioner voluntarily and intelligently waived his right to a jury trial and that sufficient evidence supported his conviction.
• Nichols v. Sullivan
  867 F.2d 1250· 10th Cir.· 1989-02-06 ·cited 10×·via Writ Of Habeas Corpus
  The court held that the petitioner's due process rights were not violated by witness testimony regarding prior incarceration or by the sentencing judge's alleged bias, and thus affirmed the dismissal of his habeas corpus petition.
• Palmer v. Grammer
  863 F.2d 588· 8th Cir.· 1988-12-15 ·cited 10×
  The Double Jeopardy Clause does not preclude retrial when a conviction is reversed due to the erroneous admission of evidence, even if the remaining evidence is insufficient, as the reviewing court must consider all evidence admitted at trial.
• Smith v. Armontrout
  865 F.2d 1502· 8th Cir.· 1988-12-08 ·cited 10×
  The dissenting judges believe that Gerald Smith's personal history supports the need for a current evidentiary hearing to determine his competency to dismiss his appeal.
• Ozzie K. Cheek v. United States
  858 F.2d 1330· 8th Cir.· 1988-10-11 ·cited 10×·via Habeas Corpus Relief
  The court held that a defendant who knowingly and voluntarily waives his right to direct appeal as part of a cooperation agreement cannot later raise claims that could have been raised on direct appeal in a § 2255 motion.
• Blue v. Lacy
  857 F.2d 479· 8th Cir.· 1988-09-20 ·cited 10×
  The Parole Commission may consider disputed allegations of criminal activity in a PSI, even if the sentencing court disregarded them, if the Commission finds the information sufficiently accurate for its purposes.
• Simmons v. A.L. Lockhart
  856 F.2d 1144· 8th Cir.· 1988-09-14 ·cited 10×
  The court granted the motion to recall its mandate and petition for rehearing, remanding the case to the District Court for further proceedings on specific constitutional claims.
• Graham v. Lynaugh
  854 F.2d 715· 5th Cir.· 1988-08-31 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the petitioner failed to make a substantial showing of the denial of a federal right and therefore denied his petition for a certificate of probable cause.
• Gregorio F. Vargas v. Swan
  854 F.2d 1028· 7th Cir.· 1988-08-12 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the record was insufficient to determine if the INS's detainer or parole status constituted sufficient custody for federal habeas jurisdiction, and remanded for further factual development.
• Sparks v. Sowders
  852 F.2d 882· 6th Cir.· 1988-08-04 ·cited 10×
  The court held that a petitioner is entitled to an evidentiary hearing on an ineffective assistance of counsel claim when alleging gross misadvice concerning parole eligibility that affected his guilty plea.
• Pratt v. D.J. McCARTHY
  850 F.2d 590· 9th Cir.· 1988-06-29 ·cited 10×·via Habeas Corpus Proceedings
  The court held that a misunderstanding among counsel regarding who would file a notice of appeal does not constitute excusable neglect under Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 4(a)(5).
• Lane T. Mele v. Fitchburg Dist. Court
  850 F.2d 817· 1st Cir.· 1988-06-15 ·cited 10×
  An issue is not considered fairly presented to the state's highest court for exhaustion purposes unless the applicant has raised it within the application for further appellate review.
• Gauntlett v. Kelley
  849 F.2d 213· 6th Cir.· 1988-06-08 ·cited 10×
  The court held that a harsher sentence imposed after a defendant successfully appeals their original sentence does not violate due process or double jeopardy if there is no presumption of vindictiveness and the defendant had no reasonable expectation of finality in the original s
• Meeks v. Cabana
  845 F.2d 1319· 5th Cir.· 1988-05-31 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the appellant waived his right to appeal his conviction and sentence, and thus, the dismissal of his habeas corpus petition was affirmed.
• Doucette v. Vose
  842 F.2d 538· 1st Cir.· 1988-03-23 ·cited 10×
  The SJC's review of a claimed instructional error under state law, even if referencing federal constitutional issues, does not waive a procedural default for federal habeas review.
• Browning v. Foltz
  837 F.2d 276· 6th Cir.· 1988-01-21 ·cited 10×
  A violation of the Interstate Agreement on Detainers (IAD) does not provide a basis for federal habeas corpus relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2254, and even if it did, no violation occurred in this case. Furthermore, the court found no reversible error regarding jury instructions, ineff
• Wright v. State OF Minn. & Robert A. Erickson
  833 F.2d 746· 8th Cir.· 1987-11-18 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the appellant was not entitled to habeas relief because the state court's findings of competency and effective assistance of counsel were supported by the record, and an evidentiary hearing was not required.
• United States ex rel. Steve Shore v. O'Leary
  833 F.2d 663· 7th Cir.· 1987-11-09 ·cited 10×·via Habeas Corpus Relief
  The court held that the district court correctly denied the habeas corpus petition because the state court's conviction was supported by sufficient evidence and the petitioner did not demonstrate a constitutional violation or the need for a federal evidentiary hearing.
• Field v. Sheriff OF Wake Cnty.
  831 F.2d 530· 4th Cir.· 1987-10-23 ·cited 10×·via Habeas Corpus Relief
  The court held that the presence of serious injury as a result of impaired driving is a sentencing factor, not an element of the offense, and therefore does not require a jury determination.
• Spina v. C.L. Aaron
  821 F.2d 1126· 5th Cir.· 1987-07-17 ·cited 10×
  A federal prisoner's Bivens-type suit challenging the fact or duration of confinement, even for damages, must first exhaust available habeas corpus remedies.
• Johnston v. Makowski
  823 F.2d 387· 10th Cir.· 1987-07-07 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the jury's consideration of an unadmitted police report did not violate appellant's rights, nor did an impermissibly suggestive photographic identification, because under the totality of the circumstances, the identification was reliable.
• Bolyea v. State
  508 So. 2d 457· Fla. 2d DCA· 1987-05-27 ·cited 10×·via Writ Of Habeas Corpus
  A probationer, whether or not incarcerated as a condition of probation, is considered 'in custody' for the purposes of Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850 and may seek postconviction relief.
• Feldman v. Henman
  815 F.2d 1318· 9th Cir.· 1987-04-29 ·cited 10×
  A district court lacks subject matter jurisdiction to entertain a federal prisoner's habeas corpus petition that raises claims already decided by the court of appeals, especially when an appeal or certiorari is pending.
• Jairo E. Betancourt v. Willis
  814 F.2d 1546· 11th Cir.· 1987-04-20 ·cited 10×
  The court held that ineffective assistance of counsel rendered the guilty plea involuntary, affirming the grant of habeas corpus relief.
• Nell v. Warden Charles James
  811 F.2d 100· 2d Cir.· 1987-01-30 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the petitioner's second habeas petition was an abuse of the writ and that he failed to allege sufficient facts for his ineffective assistance of counsel claim.
• Webb v. Keohane
  804 F.2d 413· 7th Cir.· 1986-10-30 ·cited 10×
  A prisoner waives rights under the Interstate Agreement on Detainers (IAD) anti-shuttling provision by requesting transfer to another facility, and failure to raise issues in state court constitutes a procedural default that federal habeas review cannot excuse without a showing o
• McLESTER v. Smith
  802 F.2d 1330· 11th Cir.· 1986-10-20 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the Alabama Habitual Offender Act was properly applied to the appellant's sentence, and his Eighth Amendment challenge based on disproportionality failed.
• Duncan Peder McKENZIE, Jr. v. Risley
  801 F.2d 1519· 9th Cir.· 1986-10-08 ·cited 10×
  The court held that Sandstrom error on the element of intent is subject to harmless error analysis and that the death penalty statutes were constitutional. The court affirmed the denial of the habeas corpus petition.
• Evans v. Raines
  800 F.2d 884· 9th Cir.· 1986-09-23 ·cited 10×
  State court findings on competency to waive counsel and the knowing and intelligent nature of that waiver, if fairly supported by the record, are entitled to a presumption of correctness in federal habeas proceedings.
• Ewing v. Norris W. McMACKIN
  799 F.2d 1143· 6th Cir.· 1986-09-03 ·cited 10×
  The court held that failure to raise claims on direct appeal or appeal post-conviction relief denials constitutes a procedural default, barring federal habeas review absent cause and prejudice, unless the actual innocence exception applies. Ineffective assistance of counsel must
• Vickers v. Ricketts
  798 F.2d 369· 9th Cir.· 1986-08-27 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the failure to instruct the jury on second-degree murder in a capital case, where evidence could support such a verdict, violates due process principles established in Beck v. Alabama.
• Mendrano v. Smith
  797 F.2d 1538· 10th Cir.· 1986-07-31 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the Uniform Code of Military Justice's two-thirds voting rule for convictions in a six-member general court-martial does not violate the Fifth Amendment's Due Process Clause, as military necessity justifies different standards than civilian jury trials.
• Nat'l Ctr. FOR Immigrants' Rights, Inc. v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv.
  791 F.2d 1351· 9th Cir.· 1986-06-13 ·cited 10×·via Habeas Corpus Proceedings
  The court held that the Attorney General's statutory authority under the Immigration and Nationality Act to impose conditions on appearance and delivery bonds is limited to those conditions that ensure the alien's appearance at future proceedings, not conditions barring employmen
• Davis v. Blackburn
  789 F.2d 350· 5th Cir.· 1986-05-14 ·cited 10×·via Application For Writ Of Habeas Corpus
  A federal court need not grant an evidentiary hearing on a habeas petition if the alleged newly discovered evidence is discoverable by reasonable diligence and consists solely of a recanted trial witness affidavit rejected by the state trial court.