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

• Netherly v. Dugger
  513 So. 2d 259· Fla. 2d DCA· 1987-10-02 ·cited 4×
  Florida appellate court affirmed denial of habeas corpus petition where inmate challenged forfeiture of gain time as ex post facto, holding the petition was premature because inmate remained legally confined.
• Turner v. Henman
  829 F.2d 612· 7th Cir.· 1987-09-14 ·cited 4×·via Writ Of Habeas Corpus
  A prisoner is not entitled to habeas corpus relief for the Parole Commission's failure to follow its own regulations unless that failure also violates a constitutional provision.
• Carter v. Lynaugh
  826 F.2d 408· 5th Cir.· 1987-09-10 ·cited 4×·via Habeas Corpus Relief
  The court held that the inmate failed to demonstrate prejudice, a prerequisite for habeas relief, even if his guilty plea was not knowing and voluntary or his counsel was ineffective.
• Rosario Joseph Dispensa v. Lynaugh
  826 F.2d 375· 5th Cir.· 1987-09-04 ·cited 4×
  The court held that new evidence presented at a federal habeas hearing, which significantly strengthens the petitioner's claims regarding an impermissibly suggestive identification procedure, requires the state courts to be given an opportunity to consider this evidence first.
• Webb v. Black
  826 F.2d 769· 8th Cir.· 1987-08-18 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court correctly denied the habeas corpus petition because the petitioner failed to overcome the presumption of verity attached to his guilty plea and state court findings.
• Sahagian v. Dickey
  827 F.2d 90· 7th Cir.· 1987-08-14 ·cited 4×·via Habeas Corpus Proceedings
  The court held that a state is not constitutionally required to provide legal materials for discretionary appeals, but reversed the denial of damages for denial of access at Marion, remanding for further proceedings.
• Escalera v. Coombe
  826 F.2d 185· 2d Cir.· 1987-08-13 ·cited 4×
  The court held that precluding an alibi witness solely as a sanction for noncompliance with notice statutes, absent a showing of substantial prejudice, violates the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments, and that the district court erred in failing to review the sufficiency of evidenti
• Pillette v. Dale Foltz & Frank Kelley
  824 F.2d 494· 6th Cir.· 1987-07-23 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the petitioner failed to exhaust his state remedies for his ineffective assistance of counsel claim and that futility did not excuse this failure.
• Eddy Ray Messimer v. A.L. Lockhart
  822 F.2d 43· 8th Cir.· 1987-06-30 ·cited 4×·via Petition For Habeas Corpus Relief
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing the habeas corpus petition for abuse of the writ and procedural default, finding the appellant had adequate notice.
• Glass v. Hilton Butler
  820 F.2d 112· 5th Cir.· 1987-06-10 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the applicant failed to make a substantial showing of the denial of a federal right, thus denying the certificate of probable cause and dismissing the appeal.
• Agan v. Duggar
  508 So. 2d 11· Fla.· 1987-06-08 ·cited 4×·via Writ Of Habeas Corpus
  James Agan, under a death warrant, petitioned the Florida Supreme Court for a writ of habeas corpus and a stay of execution. The Court denied both petitions, rejecting claims that the sentencing judge failed to consider nonstatutory mitigating circumstances and that appellate cou
• Augustine v. Brewer
  821 F.2d 365· 7th Cir.· 1987-05-28 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the Parole Commission did not breach the plea agreement, abuse its discretion, or engage in double-counting when determining the petitioner's offense severity rating and presumptive parole date.
• Quenton N. Brown v. Butler
  815 F.2d 1054· 5th Cir.· 1987-05-05 ·cited 4×
  A pro se petitioner is not barred by abuse of the writ for raising claims based on new controlling case law of which they were unaware. The claim regarding psychiatric testimony and self-incrimination warrants a hearing.
• Hernandez v. State
  501 So. 2d 163· Fla. 3d DCA· 1987-01-27 ·cited 4×·via Writ Of Habeas Corpus
  Hernandez's appellate counsel failed to challenge a sentence imposed outside sentencing guidelines that lacked clear and convincing written reasons for departure. The court granted his habeas corpus petition for ineffective assistance of appellate counsel and remanded for resente
• Kilby v. Otie Jones
  809 F.2d 324· 6th Cir.· 1987-01-16 ·cited 4×
• Davis v. Blackburn
  803 F.2d 1371· 5th Cir.· 1986-11-10 ·cited 4×
  A federal court is not foreclosed from sua sponte applying the principle of Stone v. Powell when the petitioner has had a full and fair hearing on their Fourth Amendment claim in state court.
• Duffy v. Foltz
  804 F.2d 50· 6th Cir.· 1986-10-23 ·cited 4×·via Habeas Corpus Relief
  The court held that a defendant's counsel's concession of factual guilt to pursue an insanity defense does not violate the right to a jury trial or due process, and that sanity is not an element of the crimes under Michigan law.
• Stewart v. Louie L. Wainwright
  802 F.2d 395· 11th Cir.· 1986-10-06 ·cited 4×
  The court granted a stay of execution of the death sentence pending further order.
• Woodrick v. Captain Peter B. Hungerford
  800 F.2d 1413· 5th Cir.· 1986-10-01 ·cited 4×
  A servicemember seeking rescission of enlistment contracts via habeas corpus must exhaust all available intraservice remedies, unless they can demonstrate futility or irreparable harm in doing so.
• Hunt v. M.L. Woodson
  800 F.2d 416· 4th Cir.· 1986-09-11 ·cited 4×
  The dissenting judge believes the majority opinion incorrectly reversed the district court's judgment.
• Smith v. Louie L. Wainwright
  799 F.2d 1442· 11th Cir.· 1986-09-08 ·cited 4×·via Writ Of Habeas Corpus
  The court affirmed the district court's grant of a writ of habeas corpus, finding that the defendant was deprived of critical evidence due to the state's failure to disclose prior inconsistent statements of a key witness.
• Myrick v. Herb Maschner & the Attorney Gen. of the State of Kan.
  799 F.2d 642· 10th Cir.· 1986-08-29 ·cited 4×·via Habeas Corpus Relief
  The court held that a constitutionally deficient jury instruction regarding intent was harmless error because the evidence overwhelmingly established the petitioner's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, and the instruction did not affect the verdict. The court also held that the pet
• Red Martin Cain v. Petrovsky
  798 F.2d 1194· 8th Cir.· 1986-08-20 ·cited 4×·via Writ Of Habeas Corpus
  The court held that federal courts lack jurisdiction under § 2241 to grant relief for violations of state law or state speedy trial provisions, and that jail time served in connection with a dropped federal charge is not creditable against a federal sentence for unrelated offense
• Wickstrom v. Schardt
  798 F.2d 268· 7th Cir.· 1986-08-19 ·cited 4×
  The court affirmed the dismissal of the habeas corpus petition because at least one claim was unexhausted and the petitioner was no longer in custody.
• Tyree v. J.D. White
  796 F.2d 390· 11th Cir.· 1986-08-11 ·cited 4×
  The court affirmed the denial of habeas corpus on four claims but reversed and remanded for an evidentiary hearing on the claim of an unconstitutionally disproportionate sentence.
• Bradshaw v. O.L. McCOTTER
  796 F.2d 100· 5th Cir.· 1986-08-06 ·cited 4×
  A judge should not be required to recuse themselves based solely on appearances when there is no actual bias or question of impartiality.
• McCOY v. Cabana
  794 F.2d 177· 5th Cir.· 1986-07-11 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the petitioner's constitutional rights were not violated during his state court conviction, affirming the denial of his habeas corpus petition.
• Daniel v. Warden, State Corr. Inst. AT Huntingdon, PA. & the Attorney Gen. of the State of Pa. Appeal of John Robert Daniel
  794 F.2d 880· 3d Cir.· 1986-07-08 ·cited 4×·via Writ Of Habeas Corpus
  The court held that the district court erred in applying the presumption of correctness under 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d) to the state court's determination of the double jeopardy claim, but affirmed the denial of the writ because the double jeopardy claim lacked merit.
• Holland v. Scully
  797 F.2d 57· 2d Cir.· 1986-07-07 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the admission of co-defendants' confessions, in light of the Supreme Court's decision in Lee v. Illinois, constituted a Bruton violation that could not be considered harmless error.
• Bautista v. O.L. McCOTTER
  793 F.2d 109· 5th Cir.· 1986-06-30 ·cited 4×
  A Texas inmate seeking federal habeas relief has not exhausted state remedies if they failed to petition the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals for review of their conviction, even if review is discretionary.
• Black v. State
  490 So. 2d 1287· Fla. 1st DCA· 1986-06-18 ·cited 4×·via Writ Of Habeas Corpus
• Shuman v. Wolff
  791 F.2d 788· 9th Cir.· 1986-06-12 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the admission of a codefendant's confession in a 1958 murder trial constituted harmless error, and that Nevada's mandatory death penalty statute for a person serving a life sentence violated the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments.
• Nason Gene Soileau v. Blackburn
  789 F.2d 1209· 5th Cir.· 1986-05-21 ·cited 4×
  A Rule 9(a) dismissal of a habeas corpus petition is inappropriate without providing the petitioner notice and an opportunity to be heard.
• Campbell v. A.L. Lockhart
  789 F.2d 644· 8th Cir.· 1986-04-30 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the trial court's acceptance of a guilty plea did not violate due process, and the defendant's counsel did not provide ineffective assistance.
• Seccia v. Louie L. Wainwright
  487 So. 2d 1156· Fla. 1st DCA· 1986-04-23 ·cited 4×·via Writ Of Habeas Corpus
  Richard Seccia appeals the dismissal of his habeas corpus petition, which was filed by a fellow inmate acting as his "next friend." The court reversed the dismissal, holding that habeas corpus petitions may be filed by a friend or agent on behalf of a detained person, and that co
• Funchess v. Louie L. Wainwright
  486 So. 2d 592· Fla.· 1986-04-17 ·cited 4×·via Writ Of Habeas Corpus
  David Livingston Funchess petitioned for a writ of habeas corpus and stay of execution following his 1975 conviction for two counts of first-degree murder. The Florida Supreme Court denied both requests, holding that Funchess's challenge to death-qualified juries was procedurally
• Breeland v. Blackburn
  786 F.2d 1239· 5th Cir.· 1986-04-11 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the denial of severance was not an abuse of discretion, as the appellant failed to demonstrate prejudice sufficient to warrant relief under Fed. R. Crim. P. 14.
• Greenawalt v. Ricketts
  784 F.2d 1453· 9th Cir.· 1986-03-20 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the case was governed by Shea v. Louisiana, meaning Edwards v. Arizona applied to Greenawalt's questioning because his petition for certiorari was pending when Edwards was decided.
• Breest v. Cunningham
  784 F.2d 435· 1st Cir.· 1986-02-28 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the petitioner failed to meet the 'cause' and 'prejudice' requirements for federal habeas corpus relief, affirming the denial of the writ.
• Bradburn v. O.L. McCOTTER
  786 F.2d 627· 5th Cir.· 1986-01-28 ·cited 4×
  The state waived its exhaustion defense by not raising it in the district court, and the petitioner's Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination was not violated by police questioning.
• Myers v. Linwood V. Stephenson
  781 F.2d 1036· 4th Cir.· 1986-01-16 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the prisoner's notice of appeal was timely filed due to excusable neglect and the district court's sua sponte extension, and that an evidentiary hearing is required on the claim of a guilty plea based on misinformation.
• Crowley v. Landon
  780 F.2d 440· 4th Cir.· 1985-12-26 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the petitioners' reincarceration did not violate their constitutional rights to equal protection, due process, or protection against ex post facto laws or cruel and unusual punishment.
• Watson v. Marshall
  784 F.2d 722· 6th Cir.· 1985-12-26 ·cited 4×·via Habeas Corpus Relief
  The dissenting judge believes the prosecutor's actions and defense counsel's inactions deprived the appellant of a fair trial, warranting a retrial or release.
• Abelino Rodriguez v. Ricketts
  777 F.2d 527· 9th Cir.· 1985-12-02 ·cited 4×·via Habeas Corpus Relief
  The court held that the Due Process Clause does not require state courts to establish a factual basis for a guilty plea absent special circumstances, and that no conflict of interest affected the adequacy of appellate representation.
• Schaeffer v. Black
  774 F.2d 865· 8th Cir.· 1985-10-01 ·cited 4×
  The court held that a habeas petitioner claiming ineffective assistance of counsel due to external constraints must still demonstrate actual prejudice, and that state court factual findings are entitled to a presumption of correctness.
• Ervin Devere Ellison v. Sachs
  769 F.2d 955· 4th Cir.· 1985-08-02 ·cited 4×·via Writ Of Habeas Corpus
  The court affirmed the conviction, finding the admission of the child victim's hearsay statements violated the defendant's Sixth Amendment right to confront witnesses.
• Bumgarner v. Bloodworth
  768 F.2d 297· 8th Cir.· 1985-07-24 ·cited 4×
  The state appealed an order dismissing drug trafficking charges against appellees, which were based on an investigation using a confidential informant, Robert Bennett, who had an agreement for a reduced sentence.
• FAY v. O.L. McCOTTER
  765 F.2d 475· 5th Cir.· 1985-07-15 ·cited 4×
  The court held that a state trial judge's determination of jury deadlock, which forms the basis for a mistrial, is entitled to great deference on federal habeas review, and the record supported the finding of manifest necessity for the mistrial.
• Benson v. Armontrout
  767 F.2d 454· 8th Cir.· 1985-07-09 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the District Court erred in denying a Rule 60(b) motion for lack of jurisdiction, as an appeal had already been decided.
• Barton v. A.L. Lockhart
  762 F.2d 712· 8th Cir.· 1985-05-22 ·cited 4×·via Habeas Corpus Relief
  A defendant is denied due process when a sentencing judge relies on materially false information in a presentence report and the defendant lacks a meaningful opportunity to rebut the inaccuracies.