235 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 1,235 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort
-
Shaun Whitt, a Florida inmate convicted in 2014 of sexual battery against a minor, petitioned for federal habeas corpus relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2254, raising five claims including exclusion of evidence about prior abuse, ineffective assistance of counsel regarding his decision n
-
The court held that the petitioner's claims of ineffective assistance of counsel were meritless, as the state court's decisions were not contrary to or an unreasonable application of federal law, nor based on an unreasonable determination of facts.
-
The court held that most of Petitioner's claims were procedurally defaulted or not cognizable on federal habeas review, and the remaining claims were denied on the merits under AEDPA deference.
-
The court held that the state court's denial of the petition for writ of habeas corpus was not contrary to or an unreasonable application of federal law, and the factual findings were reasonable.
-
The court held that a federal habeas petition filed after the expiration of the one-year limitations period under AEDPA, which was not tolled by an untimely state postconviction motion, is time-barred.
-
The federal habeas petition is dismissed as time-barred under AEDPA because the petitioner failed to file within the one-year limitations period, and no tolling or exceptions applied.
-
The court held that the petitioner's habeas corpus petition was untimely filed under AEDPA's one-year statute of limitations and that equitable tolling was not warranted. The court also denied a certificate of appealability.
-
The court denied the petition for a writ of habeas corpus, finding that the state court's decisions were not contrary to federal law and were based on reasonable determinations of fact.
-
The court held that the state court's adjudication of the petitioner's claims was not contrary to or an unreasonable application of federal law, and thus denied the petition for writ of habeas corpus.
-
The court held that the petitioner failed to show that the state court's denial of his ineffective assistance of counsel claims was contrary to or an unreasonable application of federal law, or based on an unreasonable determination of facts.
-
The court held that the petitioner's habeas corpus petition was untimely filed and dismissed it.
-
The court held that the petitioner's federal habeas petition was timely filed because his notice of appeal was deemed timely under Florida's prison mailbox rule, which tolled the statute of limitations.
-
The federal court denied the habeas petition, finding the state court's adjudication of the claims was not contrary to federal law or an unreasonable determination of facts.
-
The court held that the petitioner's claims were either procedurally barred, not substantial enough to overcome procedural default, or that the state court's adjudication was not contrary to federal law or an unreasonable determination of facts.
-
The court held that the petitioner failed to exhaust his claim regarding the sufficiency of a mental health evaluation because the issue of whether Baker Act materials should have been considered was never presented to the state courts.
-
Tyrone D. Blackshear, Sr., an inmate convicted in Clay County, Florida of lewd or lascivious battery and molestation of his stepdaughter, filed a federal habeas petition challenging his conviction on multiple grounds including ineffective assistance of trial and appellate counsel
-
The court denied the petition for writ of habeas corpus, finding that the petitioner's claims were either not cognizable on federal review, procedurally defaulted, or failed to demonstrate a violation of federal law or constitutional rights.
-
Juan Carlos Cruz, a Florida inmate, sought federal habeas relief challenging his murder conviction, alleging trial counsel provided ineffective assistance by failing to investigate alternative defenses (insanity and excusable homicide) and by pursuing a mistaken-identity defense
-
The court denied the petition for writ of habeas corpus, finding no substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right and thus denying a certificate of appealability.
-
Pasquale Morganti, a Florida inmate, filed a federal habeas petition challenging his 2013 convictions for burglary and grand theft, raising nine claims including allegations of insufficient evidence, ineffective assistance of trial and appellate counsel, and various trial errors.
-
The court held that the petitioner's federal habeas corpus petition was untimely filed and not subject to equitable tolling or the actual innocence exception.
-
The court denied the amended petition for a writ of habeas corpus, finding that the petitioner's claims were either procedurally barred, speculative, or failed to demonstrate prejudice.
-
The court held that the state court's denial of the petitioner's claims was not contrary to or an unreasonable application of federal law, nor based on an unreasonable determination of facts.
-
The court held that the state court's decision admitting the 911 recording was not contrary to or an unreasonable application of federal law, and that the claims of ineffective assistance of counsel were either procedurally defaulted or lacked merit.
-
The court held that the state court's denial of the petitioner's claims of ineffective assistance of counsel was not contrary to federal law or based on an unreasonable determination of facts.
-
The court held that the petitioner's claims of ineffective assistance of counsel lacked merit and were not contrary to or an unreasonable application of federal law.
-
The court held that the petitioner's habeas petition was untimely and equitable tolling was not warranted because the attorney's misadvice, while negligent, did not rise to the level of abandonment or extraordinary circumstance required for tolling.
-
The court held that the petitioner's habeas corpus petition was untimely filed and not subject to equitable tolling, warranting dismissal.
-
In Queen v. Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections, a federal district court denied a state prisoner's habeas corpus petition challenging his drug trafficking conviction on grounds of ineffective assistance of trial counsel. The court found that the petitioner failed to mee
-
Dixon challenged his state court convictions for aggravated assault with a firearm, possession of a firearm by a convicted felon, and carrying a concealed firearm in a federal habeas corpus petition, raising seven grounds of error. The District Court denied the petition, finding
-
The court held that the petitioner's claims were unexhausted and procedurally barred, and even if considered on the merits, did not meet the AEDPA standard for federal habeas relief.
-
The court held that the petitioner's claims were denied on the merits, as the state court's decisions were not contrary to federal law and were based on reasonable fact determinations, and thus habeas relief was not warranted.
-
The court held that the petitioner's federal habeas corpus petition was untimely filed and that his claims of actual innocence and equitable tolling did not excuse the delay.
-
A federal district court in Florida denied Johnny L. Jones's habeas corpus petition challenging his 2012 state court conviction for burglary while armed with a firearm and grand theft, rejecting his claims that Fourth Amendment violations, coercive police interrogation, and ineff
-
The court held that the petitioner's claims were either unexhausted, procedurally barred, or failed to meet the Strickland standard for ineffective assistance of counsel, and thus denied the petition for a writ of habeas corpus.
-
Michael Lee Smith, an inmate convicted in 2013 of armed burglary with assault and attempted armed robbery, filed a federal habeas petition challenging his conviction on multiple grounds of ineffective assistance of trial counsel. The district court dismissed the petition, conclud
-
Casie Lanee White, convicted of second-degree murder in 2015 with a life sentence, filed a federal habeas corpus petition challenging her conviction on eleven grounds, primarily alleging ineffective assistance of trial counsel. The district court denied all of her claims, finding
-
The federal court held that the state court's denial of the petitioner's claims of ineffective assistance of counsel was not contrary to federal law and was based on a reasonable determination of the facts.
-
The court held that the state court's denial of the petitioner's ineffective assistance of counsel claims was not contrary to or an unreasonable application of federal law, nor based on an unreasonable determination of facts.
-
The court held that the state court's adjudication of the petitioner's claims did not result in a decision contrary to, or an unreasonable application of, clearly established federal law, nor an unreasonable determination of the facts.
-
The Court denies Ground 1 and dismisses Grounds 2 through 10 of the habeas petition, finding some claims unexhausted, others procedurally defaulted, and one cognizable only under state law.
-
The court held that the petitioner's federal habeas corpus petition was untimely filed and not entitled to statutory or equitable tolling.
-
Charles Pitts challenged his state convictions for sexual battery, false imprisonment, and domestic battery by strangulation through a federal habeas corpus petition, alleging ineffective assistance of counsel. The court denied the petition, finding that Pitts's guilty plea was k
-
Armey filed a federal habeas petition challenging his state convictions for carjacking, burglary, and theft, claiming the prosecution withheld exculpatory evidence and that his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to present an insanity defense based on mental illness. The c
-
The court denied the petitioner's habeas corpus claims, finding that his trial counsel was not ineffective under the Strickland standard.
-
The court held that the petitioner failed to demonstrate that the state court unreasonably denied his claim of ineffective assistance of trial counsel regarding an untimely motion to disqualify the judge.
-
A Florida state prisoner serving a mandatory life sentence for sexual battery upon a child sought federal habeas relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2254, challenging his 2011 conviction on eleven grounds, including claims of child hearsay evidence admission, ineffective assistance of trial
-
The court held that the state court's adjudications of the petitioner's claims were not contrary to, or an unreasonable application of, clearly established federal law, nor based on an unreasonable determination of the facts.
-
The court denied the amended petition for a writ of habeas corpus, finding that the petitioner's claims were either unexhausted, procedurally barred, or without merit under AEDPA review standards.
-
The court held that the state court's adjudications of the petitioner's claims were not contrary to, or an unreasonable application of, clearly established federal law, nor based on an unreasonable determination of the facts.