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

• Pignone v. Sands
  589 F.2d 76· 1st Cir.· 1978-12-29 ·cited 8×
  Federal habeas corpus relief is precluded under Stone v. Powell because the state courts afforded the petitioner a full and fair opportunity to litigate his Fourth Amendment claim.
• Carr v. State OF Ala.
  586 F.2d 462· 5th Cir.· 1978-12-15 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court erred in finding the jury deliberation claim unexhausted, but correctly found the lineup and self-incrimination claims to be without merit.
• United States v. Degnan
  587 F.2d 619· 3d Cir.· 1978-11-28 ·cited 8×·via Writ Of Habeas Corpus
  The court held that orders granting writs of habeas corpus but not yet disposing of the relators' custody are not final appealable orders.
• Shane v. State OF Iowa
  581 F.2d 727· 8th Cir.· 1978-08-22 ·cited 8×·via Writ Of Habeas Corpus
  The court affirmed the dismissal of the habeas corpus petition, finding the Fourth Amendment claim precluded and the identification issue unexhausted in state courts.
• Alexander v. Smith
  582 F.2d 212· 2d Cir.· 1978-08-07 ·cited 8×
  The court affirmed the denial of the habeas corpus petition, holding that the petitioner's confession was voluntary and not obtained in violation of his Fifth or Sixth Amendment rights.
• Grant v. White
  579 F.2d 48· 8th Cir.· 1978-07-06 ·cited 8×·via Habeas Corpus Relief
  The court held that while the use of an invalid juvenile adjudication for impeachment was harmless error, the use of the same adjudication for enhanced sentencing requires resentencing.
• Girard v. Goins
  575 F.2d 160· 8th Cir.· 1978-04-13 ·cited 8×·via Habeas Corpus Relief
  The court held that the petitioners did not waive their right to a jury trial and had exhausted their state remedies, and that the fines imposed for criminal contempt constituted a serious offense, thus violating their constitutional right to a jury trial.
• Pineda v. State
  564 F.2d 1163· 5th Cir.· 1977-12-19 ·cited 8×
  The court held that a prosecutor's unanswered question on cross-examination, asking if the defendant had previously told his trial story, did not violate the Fifth Amendment by commenting on the defendant's silence.
• Bradley v. Louie L. Wainwright
  561 F.2d 1200· 5th Cir.· 1977-10-27 ·cited 8×·via Writ Of Habeas Corpus
  The appellate court's decision to grant rehearing and affirm the conviction is upheld, and the petition for a writ of habeas corpus is dismissed.
• Thacker v. Bordenkircher
  557 F.2d 98· 6th Cir.· 1977-06-23 ·cited 8×
  The court held that a federal district court errs in denying a habeas corpus petition without reviewing the state trial court transcript, relying solely on a state appellate court's summary.
• Sandoval v. Aaron
  562 F.2d 13· 10th Cir.· 1977-06-20 ·cited 8×
  A state prisoner who has had a full and fair opportunity to litigate his Fourth Amendment claim in state court cannot obtain federal habeas corpus relief on that claim.
• Larson v. McKENZIE
  554 F.2d 131· 4th Cir.· 1977-04-20 ·cited 8×
  A parole revocation hearing is not constitutionally required until the parole violator has completed serving an intervening sentence.
• Beaulieu v. Hartigan
  554 F.2d 1· 1st Cir.· 1977-04-06 ·cited 8×·via Habeas Corpus Relief
  The court affirmed the denial of habeas corpus relief, vacating the order granting bail.
• Barnett v. Hopper
  548 F.2d 550· 5th Cir.· 1977-03-10 ·cited 8×
  A criminal sentence conditioned on immediate payment of a fine, which the defendant later cannot pay due to circumstances arising after the plea, is unconstitutional if it results in imprisonment.
• 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.
• Holt v. Black
  550 F.2d 1061· 6th Cir.· 1977-03-03 ·cited 8×·via Writ Of Habeas Corpus
  The court held that the double jeopardy clause, as interpreted in Breed v. Jones, applies retroactively to a 1973 conviction where the appellant was adjudicated delinquent for the same offense prior to his criminal conviction.
• Stroble v. Egeler
  547 F.2d 339· 6th Cir.· 1977-01-13 ·cited 8×·via Petition For Habeas Corpus Relief
  The court held that the district court erred in its determination regarding the Interstate Agreement on Detainers and ordered a remand for further proceedings.
• ST. Pierre v. Helgemoe
  545 F.2d 1306· 1st Cir.· 1976-12-16 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the petitioner's claim, even if based on a retroactive change in law, must first be presented to state courts for exhaustion of remedies.
• Vitello v. Gaughan
  544 F.2d 17· 1st Cir.· 1976-11-08 ·cited 8×
  A petitioner is not entitled to habeas corpus relief for a warrant defect if the error was not prejudicial.
• Norris v. Slayton
  540 F.2d 1241· 4th Cir.· 1976-09-16 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the failure to disclose a police report containing the victim's initial doubt about the assailant's identity constituted a Brady violation, entitling the petitioner to habeas corpus relief.
• Sellars v. Estelle
  536 F.2d 1104· 5th Cir.· 1976-08-13 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the Governor's commutation of a death sentence to 99 years imprisonment, even if it deprived the petitioner of a state law right to jury resentencing, did not present a federal constitutional question cognizable in habeas corpus.
• Rodriguez v. Estelle
  536 F.2d 1096· 5th Cir.· 1976-08-12 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the denial of habeas corpus relief was proper because the appellant's claims did not present constitutional violations and any procedural defaults were waived.
• Clark v. Wyrick
  538 F.2d 1327· 8th Cir.· 1976-07-20 ·cited 8×·via Writ Of Habeas Corpus
  The court held that a Rule 60(b) motion cannot serve as a substitute for a timely appeal from the original judgment.
• Ross v. Mebane
  536 F.2d 1199· 7th Cir.· 1976-06-30 ·cited 8×·via Writ Of Habeas Corpus
  The court held that claims challenging the fact or duration of confinement, including the deprivation of good time credits, are not moot and should be considered via habeas corpus, even if the prisoner has been transferred. Claims for injunctive relief against future punishment a
• Gill v. Estelle
  530 F.2d 1152· 5th Cir.· 1976-04-28 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the use of an unconstitutionally obtained probation revocation at the punishment stage of a trial, to argue for a longer sentence, violates due process and equal protection.
• Grady Wigfall Martin v. Rose
  525 F.2d 111· 6th Cir.· 1975-10-23 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the state's denial of a transcript of a prior federal trial for the same offense to an indigent defendant was a constitutional error that could not be deemed harmless.
• In re the Petition of Jesus Flores & Maria Gamboa Flores v. United States Immigr. & Naturalization Serv.
  524 F.2d 627· 9th Cir.· 1975-10-17 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in granting habeas corpus relief because the Immigration and Naturalization Service failed to provide reasons for denying the appellees' extension of voluntary departure.
• Edwards v. State OF La.
  520 F.2d 321· 5th Cir.· 1975-10-02 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the failure of retained counsel to perfect a direct appeal, without state involvement, does not constitute a Fourteenth Amendment violation.
• Banda v. Estelle
  519 F.2d 1057· 5th Cir.· 1975-09-19 ·cited 8×
  The federal district court did not err in denying the habeas petition without an independent evidentiary hearing, as the state habeas hearing was full and fair.
• United States ex rel. Tobia L. Spina v. McQUILLAN
  525 F.2d 813· 2d Cir.· 1975-07-16 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the petitioner failed to demonstrate a prima facie case for denial of his speedy trial right, as he did not affirmatively assert this right during the twenty-six month delay between indictment and trial, and the record did not support claims of prejudice.
• Henderson v. The Sec'y OF Corr.
  518 F.2d 694· 10th Cir.· 1975-06-26 ·cited 8×
  The court held that while a prisoner's claim for release must be brought as a habeas corpus petition, a claim for damages and injunctive relief for inadequate medical care can be brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, but in this case, the alleged inadequate care did not rise to a const
• van Blaricom v. Forscht
  511 F.2d 615· 5th Cir.· 1975-04-18 ·cited 8×
• Kirvelaitis v. Gray
  513 F.2d 213· 6th Cir.· 1975-03-31 ·cited 8×·via Habeas Corpus Relief
  The court held that while the appellant's consent to search was invalid due to the coercive circumstances, the co-occupant's consent was valid, and the entry was reasonable, thus affirming the denial of habeas corpus relief.
• McCLOUD v. Louie L. Wainwright
  508 F.2d 853· 5th Cir.· 1975-02-27 ·cited 8×
  The court held that a pro se habeas corpus petition alleging systematic exclusion of Negroes from grand and petit juries, even if crude, is sufficient to invoke federal jurisdiction and warrants further proceedings.
• Colvin v. Estelle
  506 F.2d 747· 5th Cir.· 1975-01-15 ·cited 8×
  A new penal code with different sentencing does not entitle a prisoner to release if a saving clause preserves prior convictions and sentences.
• Davis v. Pitchess
  518 F.2d 141· 9th Cir.· 1974-12-09 ·cited 8×
• Alonzo v. Estelle
  500 F.2d 672· 5th Cir.· 1974-09-16 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the Texas state courts should be afforded the opportunity to review the appellant's constitutional claims before federal habeas relief is granted.
• Bradley v. Cowan
  500 F.2d 380· 6th Cir.· 1974-07-30 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the petitioner was entitled to an evidentiary hearing on the issue of effective assistance of counsel and that the consent issue also required further factual determination.
• Pickens v. The State OF Tex.
  497 F.2d 981· 5th Cir.· 1974-07-19 ·cited 8×·via Writ Of Habeas Corpus
  The court held that revoking probation based on speech protected by the First Amendment constitutes an abuse of discretion.
• Marshall v. Rose
  499 F.2d 1163· 6th Cir.· 1974-06-25 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the admission of the victim's in-court identification was not harmless error because it was tainted by an unconstitutional showup conducted without counsel, and the state failed to prove by clear and convincing evidence that the identification had an independe
• Benedict v. Foster
  300 So. 2d 8· Fla.· 1974-06-12 ·cited 8×·via Writ Of Habeas Corpus
  The Court's judgment is joined, specifically the holding that the complaint failed to satisfy the constitutional threshold requirement of an actual case or controversy.
• State of Fla. ex rel. Robert L. Shevin v. Rawls
  290 So. 2d 477· Fla.· 1974-02-13 ·cited 8×·via Writ Of Habeas Corpus
  The Florida Supreme Court denied a writ of prohibition sought by the State to prevent the First District Court of Appeal from hearing criminal appeals, holding that timely notices of appeal filed in the Second District Court of Appeal due to improper state advice should be treate
• Fate Thomas v. Beasley
  491 F.2d 507· 6th Cir.· 1974-02-05 ·cited 8×·via Writ Of Habeas Corpus
  The court held that jeopardy attached at the first trial, and the declaration of a mistrial over the defendant's objection without manifest necessity bars retrial.
• Jess Raymond Bridwell v. Ciccone
  490 F.2d 310· 8th Cir.· 1973-12-11 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the petitioner was entitled to a review of his parole application based on new information, but affirmed the denial of his habeas corpus petition as presented.
• Harris v. Estelle
  487 F.2d 56· 5th Cir.· 1973-11-01 ·cited 8×·via Petition For Habeas Corpus Relief
  A prisoner is entitled to an out-of-time direct appeal with counsel if his indigence and desire to appeal were made known to the trial judge, even if the judge assumed retained counsel would continue representation.
• McEACHERN v. Henderson
  485 F.2d 694· 5th Cir.· 1973-10-18 ·cited 8×·via Habeas Corpus Relief
  The court held that a prisoner's claim regarding restrictions imposed by federal prison officials due to a state detainer should be considered separately from a claim challenging the validity of the detainer itself on speedy trial grounds.
• Sammie L. Nelson v. Moriarty
  484 F.2d 1034· 1st Cir.· 1973-09-20 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the petitioner had not exhausted his state remedies and therefore was not entitled to federal habeas corpus relief.
• Addison v. Fla. Parole Bd.
  281 So. 2d 906· Fla. 1st DCA· 1973-08-30 ·cited 8×·via Writ Of Habeas Corpus
  Petitioner challenged his parole revocation by the Florida Parole Commission as illegal and lacking due process. The court affirmed the revocation, finding that the Commission complied with the minimum due process requirements established in Morrissey v. Brewer.
• Sec. & Exch. Comm'n v. Radio Hill Mines Co., Ltd.
  479 F.2d 4· 2d Cir.· 1973-05-25 ·cited 8×·via Writ Of Habeas Corpus
  The court held that the district court had the equitable power to order ancillary reporting requirements as part of a preliminary injunction under the Securities Acts, and that such requirements were not unconstitutional under the Fourth or Fifth Amendments in this context.
• United States ex rel. Francis J. Sledjeski v. Commanding Officer
  478 F.2d 1147· 2d Cir.· 1973-05-03 ·cited 8×
  A reservist must be clearly advised of their right to claim hardship before their failure to do so can be considered a waiver.