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
-
Florida inmate Donmonique Cockrum sought habeas relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2254, challenging his conviction for attempted second-degree murder based on claims of ineffective assistance of both trial and appellate counsel. The district court denied all claims, finding that the recor
-
The court held that the petitioner failed to show good cause or satisfy the stringent requirements of 28 U.S.C. § 2254(e)(2) for discovery in his federal habeas corpus petition.
-
Inmate Foreman, convicted of lewd and lascivious molestation of a child, sought federal habeas relief challenging the admissibility and reliability of child hearsay testimony presented by the victim's parents and a Child Protection Team member. The federal district court denied r
-
The court held that the petitioner's claims lacked merit and denied his petition for a writ of habeas corpus.
-
The district court correctly denied Petitioner David Guzman's amended petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The court found that Guzman failed to demonstrate that the state appellate court's denial of his claims of ineffective assistance of appellate counse
-
The federal court denied the petition for writ of habeas corpus, finding no unreasonable application of federal law or unreasonable determination of facts by the state court regarding ineffective assistance of counsel claims.
-
The court adopted the Magistrate Judge's recommendation to dismiss some claims as time-barred and deny others on the merits, finding no clear error in the record.
-
Anthony Vaughan, an inmate convicted of two counts of first-degree murder in 2010, petitioned for federal habeas corpus relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2254, raising four grounds for relief including claims of ineffective assistance of counsel. The district court denied the petition on
-
The court held that the applicant's amended habeas application was untimely as to one ground and that the state court's denial of the remaining ineffective assistance of counsel claim was not an unreasonable application of federal law or determination of facts.
-
Melendez challenged his state convictions for drug trafficking and related offenses through a federal habeas corpus petition, asserting five grounds of ineffective assistance of counsel, including claims that his trial attorney failed to communicate a plea offer, obtain an interp
-
The court denied Petitioner's Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus, finding most claims procedurally defaulted and the remaining claims without merit.
-
The court denied the petition for writ of habeas corpus, finding the state court's adjudication of the ineffective assistance of counsel claims was not contrary to or an unreasonable application of federal law.
-
The federal habeas petition is dismissed as untimely because the petitioner exceeded the one-year limitations period established by AEDPA, and neither actual innocence nor equitable tolling applies.
-
The court held that Grounds One, Three, and Four were untimely filed and Ground Two was procedurally barred and also failed on the merits.
-
The court held that it lacked jurisdiction to review the petitioner's claims, as they constituted a direct attack on a District of Columbia appellate court decision, which is beyond the scope of federal district court review.
-
The court held that the petitioner's claims were procedurally defaulted or not cognizable in federal habeas proceedings because they were not presented as federal issues in state court.
-
Isaac Wilder, convicted in Florida state court of first-degree murder and attempted second-degree murder in 2011, filed a federal habeas corpus petition challenging his conviction based on claims of actual innocence and ineffective assistance of trial counsel, all of which the co
-
The court held that the state appellate court's adjudication of the petitioner's claims was neither contrary to, nor an unreasonable application of, clearly established federal law, nor based on an unreasonable determination of the facts.
-
The court denied the petition for a writ of habeas corpus, finding no substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2022-05-19
The court held that respondents' motion for reconsideration was untimely and failed to present grounds for relief, as the arguments raised should have been made in a timely response and did not demonstrate manifest error of law or fact.
-
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.
-
Theodore Moss, a Florida inmate convicted of first-degree murder and armed burglary in 2013, petitioned for federal habeas corpus relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2254, raising nine grounds for relief including jury instruction errors and claims of ineffective assistance of counsel. The
-
Clifton Brooks, a Florida inmate convicted in 2013 of sexual battery and lewd or lascivious molestation, filed a federal habeas corpus petition challenging his convictions on six grounds, including claims regarding defective charging documents, denial of speedy trial rights, inef
-
The court held that the petitioner's claims were procedurally defaulted or that the state court's denial of relief was entitled to deference under AEDPA.
-
The court held that the state court's denial of the petitioner's claim regarding ineffective assistance of counsel for failing to present photographs of bruises was not contrary to federal law and was not based on an unreasonable determination of facts.
-
An inmate convicted of second-degree murder in Florida challenged his conviction through a federal habeas petition, raising nine grounds of ineffective assistance of counsel. The federal district court, applying the highly deferential AEDPA standard of review, denied the petition
-
The court held that the state court's adjudication of the petitioner's ineffective assistance of counsel claim was not contrary to, nor an unreasonable application of, federal law, and was not based on an unreasonable determination of the facts.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2022-04-08
The court denied the motion for a stay of abeyance and granted leave to file an amended petition containing only exhausted claims.
-
The court denied the petitioner's motion for a certificate of appealability.
-
The court held that the state court's adjudication of the ineffective assistance of counsel claim was not contrary to federal law and denied habeas relief.
-
The court held that the federal habeas petition was untimely filed and alternatively, that the petitioner had not raised a cognizable claim for relief.
-
The court held that Claim 1 is procedurally defaulted because the federal nature of the claim was not presented to the state court on direct appeal, and Claims 2-6 are exhausted as they were fairly presented in state post-conviction proceedings.
-
The court held that the new claims in the counseled petition do not relate back to the original pro se petition and that equitable tolling is not warranted because the petitioner failed to demonstrate a causal link between his alleged mental impairment and the untimely filing.
-
Desir challenged his conviction for attempted murder with a firearm and aggravated battery by filing a federal habeas petition asserting six grounds for relief, primarily ineffective assistance of counsel claims related to jury selection, charging documents, speedy trial waiver,
-
Petitioner Hinson, an inmate serving a life sentence for second-degree murder, brought a federal habeas petition challenging his 2013 guilty plea and subsequent life sentence, raising twelve subparts of ineffective assistance of counsel claims against his trial counsel and one cl
-
The federal court denied the habeas petition, finding that the state court's procedural bar based on untimeliness was an independent and adequate state law ground, and the petitioner failed to overcome this bar.
-
The court held that the state court's adjudication of the petitioner's ineffective assistance of counsel claim was not contrary to federal law and thus denied federal habeas relief.
-
The court held that the state court's adjudication of the petitioner's claims was not contrary to, nor an unreasonable application of, clearly established federal law, and was not based on an unreasonable determination of the facts.
-
The court denied the petition for a writ of habeas corpus, finding that the petitioner's claims of ineffective assistance of counsel, both trial and appellate, did not meet the required legal standards.
-
Dennis McCloud's federal habeas petition challenging his 2010 Florida convictions for sexual battery and lewd and lascivious conduct was largely denied on procedural and substantive grounds. The court found the petition untimely as to one case because McCloud failed to file the r
-
Kevin Jerome Scott, a death row inmate whose sentence was later reduced to life imprisonment, sought federal habeas corpus relief challenging his 2009 conviction for first-degree murder, attempted armed robbery, and aggravated battery, raising four claims of ineffective assistanc
-
The court held that the state court's denial of the ineffective assistance of counsel claim was not contrary to or an unreasonable application of federal law, and that the decision not to challenge the familial/custodial authority charge was sound trial strategy.
-
The court held that the petitioner's claims of ineffective assistance of counsel and trial court error were unexhausted and procedurally barred, and otherwise without merit.
-
The court affirmed the magistrate judge's report, denying the habeas petition because the petitioner failed to establish prejudice from counsel's alleged ineffectiveness.
-
The court affirmed the magistrate judge's report, denying the petitioner's habeas petition and objections.
-
The court held that a federal inmate cannot use a § 2241 petition to challenge the validity of his sentence when the narrow exceptions do not apply.
-
The court held that the petition for writ of habeas corpus was untimely filed under AEDPA and, alternatively, lacked merit.
-
The court held that the petitioner's claim in Ground One is unexhausted because he voluntarily dismissed his appeal, and even if exhausted, the claim is meritless as counsel's actions were not deficient.
-
The court held that the petitioner's claims were not contrary to or an unreasonable application of federal law, and the state court's factual determinations were not unreasonable.
-
Wilmario Devondric Trueblood challenged his 2014 Florida convictions for burglary and grand theft in a federal habeas corpus petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254, raising claims regarding competency to stand trial, judicial impartiality, and denial of a second expert mental evaluation