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

• McCONNELL v. T.C. Martin
  896 F.2d 441· 10th Cir.· 1990-02-12 ·cited 6×
  The attempted execution of a parole violator warrant contrary to its specific instructions was invalid, allowing the Parole Commission to withdraw it and issue a new warrant as a detainer.
• Romero v. Lynaugh
  884 F.2d 871· 5th Cir.· 1989-10-05 ·cited 6×·via Application For Writ Of Habeas Corpus
  The court held that the defendant's trial counsel provided constitutionally effective assistance, and the federal district court erred in granting habeas corpus relief.
• Earsel Larry Johnson v. Trickey
  882 F.2d 316· 8th Cir.· 1989-08-10 ·cited 6×·via Habeas Corpus Relief
  The court held that a prisoner is entitled to an evidentiary hearing on claims that his conviction was obtained through the knowing use of perjured testimony and ineffective assistance of counsel, but affirmed the dismissal of a claim challenging the sufficiency of the charging i
• Harrison v. Dahm
  880 F.2d 999· 8th Cir.· 1989-07-27 ·cited 6×·via Habeas Corpus Relief
  The court held that the exclusion of defense witness testimony and the refusal to give jury instructions on the "excited utterance" exception and lack of motive did not constitute constitutional error warranting federal habeas corpus relief.
• Staten v. Neal
  880 F.2d 962· 7th Cir.· 1989-07-26 ·cited 6×·via Writ Of Habeas Corpus
  The Due Process Clause does not prohibit a state's attorney from prosecuting a defendant when a state's attorney from another county promised not to prosecute, if the first state's attorney lacked the authority to bind the second.
• Lewis v. Martin
  880 F.2d 288· 10th Cir.· 1989-07-24 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the original section 235(b)(3) of the Sentencing Reform Act of 1984 did not entitle prisoners to release within their guideline range, but rather was a phase-out provision for the Parole Commission.
• Mayo v. Lynaugh
  882 F.2d 134· 5th Cir.· 1989-06-30 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the prisoner's constitutional rights were not violated and affirmed the denial of his habeas corpus petition.
• Thomas v. Mun. Court OF the Antelope Valley Jud. Dist. OF Cal.
  878 F.2d 285· 9th Cir.· 1989-06-23 ·cited 6×·via Writ Of Habeas Corpus
  The court held that a mistrial declared sua sponte due to an attorney's conflict of interest, which the defendant refused to waive, constituted manifest necessity, thus permitting retrial without violating the Double Jeopardy Clause.
• Cook v. A.L. Lockhart
  878 F.2d 220· 8th Cir.· 1989-06-20 ·cited 6×
  The court held that a successive habeas petition may be dismissed if the claims were previously decided or should have been raised, and the petitioner fails to demonstrate that the ends of justice warrant reexamination.
• Hill v. A.L. Lockhart
  877 F.2d 698· 8th Cir.· 1989-06-14 ·cited 6×
  The dissenting judge believes the court should not grant habeas corpus relief because the claim lacks constitutional merit and was previously rejected.
• Frank v. Brookhart
  877 F.2d 671· 8th Cir.· 1989-06-09 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the petitioner failed to establish grounds for habeas corpus relief, as the state courts' factual findings were supported by the record and the petitioner did not demonstrate prejudice from alleged prosecutorial misconduct, ineffective assistance of counsel, o
• Toomey v. Clark
  876 F.2d 1433· 9th Cir.· 1989-06-08 ·cited 6×
  The court held that considering a juvenile's pregnancy in a decision to decline jurisdiction does not, on its face or in effect, constitute unlawful sex discrimination under the Equal Protection Clause, as it was rationally related to the state's interest in rehabilitation and pu
• Leavitt v. Vasquez
  875 F.2d 260· 9th Cir.· 1989-05-25 ·cited 6×
  The court held that even if the jury instruction on aiding and abetting was erroneous, the jury necessarily found the required intent, making the error harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.
• Blackmon v. Armontrout
  875 F.2d 164· 8th Cir.· 1989-05-12 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the trial court's refusal to allow the defendant to represent himself was proper, and the defendant was not prejudiced by his appellate counsel's failure to argue for a competency hearing.
• Johnson v. Denton
  542 So. 2d 447· Fla. 5th DCA· 1989-04-27 ·cited 6×·via Writ Of Habeas Corpus
  Robert Johnson appeals the trial court's denial of his motion for change of custody and the court's exercise of jurisdiction over a dependency proceeding involving his daughter. The Florida appellate court reversed, holding that the trial court violated the Uniform Child Custody
• O'Callaghan v. State
  542 So. 2d 1324· Fla.· 1989-04-20 ·cited 6×·via Writ Of Habeas Corpus
  John O'Callaghan was convicted of first-degree murder and sentenced to death. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the denial of his Rule 3.850 postconviction relief motion but granted his habeas corpus petition due to a Hitchcock violation in the penalty phase jury instructions, r
• Royce E. Denton v. Duckworth
  873 F.2d 144· 7th Cir.· 1989-04-17 ·cited 6×
  The court held that redetermining a defendant's habitual offender status after a prior conviction used for enhancement was vacated does not violate the Double Jeopardy Clause, and amending the habitual offender information did not violate due process.
• Singleton v. A.L. Lockhart
  871 F.2d 1395· 8th Cir.· 1989-04-10 ·cited 6×·via Petition For Habeas Corpus Relief
  The court held that the defendant's conviction was valid, but his death sentence should be reinstated, finding no constitutional error in jury selection or ineffective assistance of counsel, and that the prior vacating of the sentence was based on an overruled precedent.
• Lombard v. Lynaugh
  868 F.2d 1475· 5th Cir.· 1989-04-06 ·cited 6×·via Habeas Corpus Relief
  The court held that a defendant constructively denied effective assistance of appellate counsel falls under the Penson v. Ohio standard, where prejudice is presumed, obviating the need for a Strickland analysis.
• Puffinberger v. Holt
  545 So. 2d 900· Fla. 4th DCA· 1989-03-23 ·cited 6×·via Writ Of Habeas Corpus
  Petitioner sought emergency habeas corpus relief after the trial court denied her motion to reduce pretrial bond in a child abuse case. The appellate court granted the petition, finding the trial court abused its discretion by denying bond reduction based on improper criteria and
• Archuleta v. Dareld Kerby
  864 F.2d 709· 10th Cir.· 1989-01-03 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the admission of identification testimony from a suggestive show-up procedure did not violate the petitioner's due process rights because the identification was reliable under the totality of the circumstances.
• Melvin v. Nickolopoulos
  864 F.2d 301· 3d Cir.· 1988-12-30 ·cited 6×
  The court held that a prisoner's claim for damages for unlawful detention and denial of parole, even if related to a habeas corpus claim, should be treated as a civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and not dismissed for failure to exhaust state remedies.
• Hawkins v. Lynaugh
  862 F.2d 487· 5th Cir.· 1988-12-12 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the defendant failed to show substantial evidence that could not be expressed in the jury's deliberateness inquiry, and thus a stay of execution was not warranted.
• Sumpter v. Crispus NIX
  863 F.2d 563· 8th Cir.· 1988-12-07 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the defendant's confession was voluntary and his sentence did not violate double jeopardy principles.
• Stein v. Stein
  537 So. 2d 613· Fla. 4th DCA· 1988-12-07 ·cited 6×·via Writ Of Habeas Corpus
• Arthur James "Dinkey" Brunelle v. United States
  864 F.2d 64· 8th Cir.· 1988-11-21 ·cited 6×·via Habeas Corpus Relief
  The court held that a breach of a plea agreement requires resentencing before a different judge, even if the original sentencing court stated the breach did not influence its decision.
• Shedelbower v. Estelle
  859 F.2d 727· 9th Cir.· 1988-10-12 ·cited 6×
  The court held that Shedelbower's confession was not obtained in violation of his constitutional rights, as he voluntarily initiated further communication after invoking his right to counsel.
• Schiselman v. United States Parole Comm'n
  858 F.2d 1232· 7th Cir.· 1988-09-23 ·cited 6×
  The Parole Commission improperly relied on information it had previously disregarded when setting a prisoner's parole date, and therefore, the prisoner is entitled to a new hearing.
• Smith v. Duckworth
  856 F.2d 909· 7th Cir.· 1988-09-06 ·cited 6×·via Writ Of Habeas Corpus
  The court held that while the state court's implicit finding of a voluntary Miranda waiver is entitled to deference, a remand is necessary for an evidentiary hearing on the voluntariness of the confession itself due to insufficient record evidence.
• Williams v. Armontrout
  855 F.2d 578· 8th Cir.· 1988-08-29 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the district court properly dismissed the successive habeas corpus petition under Rule 9(b) because prior petitions were decided on the merits and the ends of justice did not require reaching the merits of the current petition.
• Wright v. A.L. Lockhart
  854 F.2d 309· 8th Cir.· 1988-08-17 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the petitioner's claims were either procedurally barred or without merit, and thus affirmed the denial of his habeas corpus petition.
• Buffalo v. Sunn
  854 F.2d 1158· 9th Cir.· 1988-08-16 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the district court erred in resolving a factual dispute regarding 'cause' for a procedural default based solely on conflicting affidavits, and therefore, a remand for an evidentiary hearing is required.
• Collin Montgomery v. United States
  853 F.2d 83· 2d Cir.· 1988-07-28 ·cited 6×·via Writ Of Habeas Corpus
  The court held that a guilty plea to conspiracy to distribute heroin lacked an adequate factual basis because the defendant only admitted to conspiring with government agents or informants, not with a non-government individual as required by law.
• Ciro Gargano v. United States
  852 F.2d 886· 7th Cir.· 1988-07-26 ·cited 6×·via Writ Of Habeas Corpus
  The court held that the petitioner failed to demonstrate ineffective assistance of counsel because his counsel's advice to plead guilty was within the range of professional competence and he failed to show prejudice.
• Herring v. Dugger
  528 So. 2d 1176· Fla.· 1988-06-23 ·cited 6×·via Writ Of Habeas Corpus
  Ted Herring petitioned for habeas corpus relief after his conviction and death sentence for first-degree murder, claiming ineffective assistance of appellate counsel in failing to raise nine issues on direct appeal. The Florida Supreme Court denied the petition, finding only two
• Jackson v. Dugger
  529 So. 2d 1081· Fla.· 1988-06-16 ·cited 6×·via Writ Of Habeas Corpus
  Carl Jackson challenges his death sentence under Hitchcock v. Dugger, arguing the trial court erroneously instructed the jury to consider only statutorily enumerated mitigating circumstances. The Florida Supreme Court finds the Hitchcock error was harmless beyond a reasonable dou
• Thomas v. Dugger
  846 F.2d 669· 11th Cir.· 1988-06-07 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the district court erred in limiting the scope of the remand to only laches and early parole, and that the plea discrepancy issue was not properly adjudicated below.
• Scott v. Dugger
  686 F. Supp. 1488· S.D. Fla.· 1988-05-26 ·cited 6×
  The court denied the petition for writ of habeas corpus, finding no basis for federal relief and lifting the stay of execution.
• Brown v. Lynaugh
  843 F.2d 849· 5th Cir.· 1988-05-02 ·cited 6×
  The court held that allowing the presiding trial judge to testify as a witness for the state violated the defendant's due process right to a fundamentally fair trial.
• Johnson v. Chrans
  844 F.2d 482· 7th Cir.· 1988-04-21 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in excluding hearsay evidence because Illinois' interest in applying its evidentiary rules to exclude untrustworthy evidence substantially outweighed the defendant's right to present the statements, and the excluded evidence lacked
• Lowenfield v. Butler
  843 F.2d 183· 5th Cir.· 1988-04-12 ·cited 6×
  The dissenting judge would grant a stay and remand for the district court to make a finding on whether the petitioner is entitled to a hearing on his competence to be executed.
• Ward v. A.L. Lockhart
  841 F.2d 844· 8th Cir.· 1988-03-09 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the evidence was insufficient to support the burglary conviction, violating due process, and that the case should be remanded for an evidentiary hearing on claims of ineffective assistance of counsel and improper sentencing.
• Holtan v. Black
  838 F.2d 984· 8th Cir.· 1988-02-04 ·cited 6×
  The court vacated the district court's ruling on the unconstitutionality of the death penalty statute as applied, finding the issue not ripe for review, and remanded the case for state court determination of aggravating circumstances.
• Williams v. State
  519 So. 2d 723· Fla. 5th DCA· 1988-02-04 ·cited 6×·via Writ Of Habeas Corpus
• Campbell v. Fair
  838 F.2d 1· 1st Cir.· 1988-01-26 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the petitioners' constitutional rights were not violated by the prosecution's conduct regarding a key witness or by the sufficiency of the evidence against petitioner Doherty.
• Cooper v. Sowders
  837 F.2d 284· 6th Cir.· 1988-01-21 ·cited 6×·via Writ Of Habeas Corpus
  The court held that the cumulative effect of trial errors, including improper expert testimony, bolstering of an informant's credibility, and judicial comments, rendered the petitioner's trial fundamentally unfair and a violation of due process.
• Schneider v. Lynaugh
  835 F.2d 570· 5th Cir.· 1988-01-12 ·cited 6×
  When a defendant introduces testimony concerning his mental state, even from non-psychiatric witnesses, the prosecution may rebut this evidence with testimony from a court-appointed psychiatrist, as the defendant waives his Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination.
• United States v. Garcia-Gutierrez
  835 F.2d 585· 5th Cir.· 1988-01-12 ·cited 6×
  The court held that a federal sentence cannot be credited for time served in state custody on an unrelated offense prior to the federal detainer or federal sentence, absent specific federal designation of the state facility.
• Errol B. Resnick v. United States Parole Comm'n
  835 F.2d 1297· 10th Cir.· 1987-12-21 ·cited 6×
  The court held that applying the parole statute and guidelines in effect at the time of the parole hearings, rather than at the time of the offenses, did not violate the ex post facto clause or due process rights, as the denial was based on the seriousness of the offenses and had
• United States v. Lane
  834 F.2d 645· 7th Cir.· 1987-11-24 ·cited 6×·via Habeas Corpus Relief
  The court held that the petitioner failed to demonstrate ineffective assistance of counsel or other constitutional violations, and therefore, the denial of his habeas corpus petition was affirmed.