565 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 717 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort
-
607 F.2d 31·
3d Cir.·
1979-09-26
·cited 2×
The court held that denying a defendant a hearing on a timely motion for sentence reduction due to court rule time limits, after the hearing was adjourned to obtain substitute counsel, violates the constitutional right to counsel at a critical stage of the proceeding.
-
The dissent argues that a judge's attendance at the funeral of a murder victim, followed by presiding over the accused murderer's trial, creates an appearance of impropriety that denies the defendant a fair trial.
-
The court, in dissent, argues that the denial of rehearing en banc was improper because the lower court's reasoning regarding the non-disclosure of witness inducements and exculpatory statements violated due process principles.
-
560 F.2d 393·
8th Cir.·
1977-08-19
·cited 2×
The court held that a federal habeas corpus petitioner is not entitled to a second suppression hearing if they had a full and fair opportunity to litigate their Fourth Amendment claim in state court, even if a different judge denied a subsequent motion without a hearing.
-
529 F.2d 742·
5th Cir.·
1976-04-02
·cited 2×
The court held that the petitioner's claims regarding jurisdiction, witness production, jury instructions, and effective assistance of counsel were without merit.
-
The court held that even if a pretrial photographic identification procedure was impermissibly suggestive, a conviction will not be overturned if the in-court identification has an independent basis.
-
517 F.2d 628·
4th Cir.·
1975-05-28
·cited 2×
-
The court held that photographic identification procedures, even if somewhat suggestive, do not require setting aside a conviction if there is an independent basis for the identification.
-
481 F.2d 405·
5th Cir.·
1973-07-06
·cited 2×
The Supreme Court's decision in Mayberry v. Pennsylvania, requiring a judge reviled by a contemnor to recuse themselves from contempt proceedings, should be applied retroactively.
-
470 F.2d 1366·
5th Cir.·
1973-01-10
·cited 2×
The court held that a federal district court correctly dismissed a habeas corpus petition for failure to exhaust state remedies when a direct appeal on the underlying conviction was still pending.
-
466 F.2d 522·
10th Cir.·
1972-09-11
·cited 2×
The court held that a defendant claiming mental incompetence to stand trial, particularly after recent surgery and medication, must be granted an evidentiary hearing if the claim is not conclusively refuted by existing records.
-
A mother sought habeas corpus relief to recover custody of her minor son from her parents, who were withholding the child in violation of a 1966 divorce decree awarding custody to the mother. The court upheld the mother's right to custody, finding her to be a fit and proper perso
-
435 F.2d 700·
3d Cir.·
1970-11-06
·cited 2×
The court held that the District Court did not err in denying the petition for habeas corpus relief, affirming the lower court's findings on all grounds.
-
432 F.2d 68·
9th Cir.·
1970-07-29
·cited 2×
The judgment must be reversed because the state court record, crucial for determining if the guilty plea was induced by an unfulfilled promise, was not provided to the district court.
-
A federal sentence deferred until the expiration of a state sentence begins to run when the prisoner is released from state custody and taken into federal custody, even if the state sentence has not technically expired.
-
A habeas corpus petitioner who pleads guilty does not require an evidentiary hearing if the plea was voluntary and understood.
-
The court held that the state failed to prove the defendant intelligently and understandingly waived his right to counsel at sentencing.
-
413 F.2d 1046·
5th Cir.·
1969-07-02
·cited 2×
The court held that a pre-Miranda confession's admissibility is determined by its voluntariness, and the absence of counsel does not per se invalidate it.
-
395 F.2d 666·
5th Cir.·
1968-05-29
·cited 2×
The court held that the district court erred in denying an evidentiary hearing on the appellant's habeas corpus petition.
-
The court held that the appellant failed to meet the burden of proving the state court's finding of voluntariness was erroneous, under the amended federal habeas corpus statute.
-
The court affirmed the denial of the motion to vacate the judgment, finding that the issues raised had been previously decided or waived, and that the sentence correction was favorable to the defendant.
-
The court held that the petitioner was not denied effective assistance of counsel and intelligently waived his right to a jury trial by pleading guilty.
-
The court held that a minor previously adjudicated delinquent does not require a hearing within two days to justify continued detention.
-
The court held that deliberate, purposeful use of state criminal machinery to deny constitutional rights constitutes an "extraordinary" case justifying pre-trial federal habeas relief, despite prior rulings to the contrary.
-
The court held that illegal arrest, detention, and sufficiency of evidence are not grounds for relief under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255, and counsel is not constitutionally required for such collateral attacks.
-
-
The failure to consolidate charges for trial, as suggested by a manual provision, does not violate a fundamental right reviewable by a civil court in a habeas corpus proceeding.
-
The court held that the appellant's current claims are not cognizable under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 and do not warrant collateral attack.
-
The court held that the defendant's prior appeal had already decided the statutory construction issue, and the current attempt to vacate the conviction under § 2255 was procedurally flawed and moot.
-
The court held that a prior decision of the Supreme Court did not invalidate the indictment, as the facts presented were distinguishable.
-
The Florida Supreme Court held that Miami's city ordinance regulating liquor licenses conflicted with state law (Chapter 16774, Acts of 1935) and was therefore invalid. The petitioner was arrested for operating a liquor business without paying the city license tax required under
-
In a habeas corpus proceeding, the Florida Supreme Court affirmed the Circuit Court's judgment remanding a petitioner to the County Court for correction of an allegedly defective judgment. The Court held that while habeas corpus may test the legality of commitment, remand for cor
-
In a habeas corpus proceeding, Bill Young challenged the validity of the criminal information filed by an assistant county solicitor on the grounds that the Florida Constitution required the prosecuting attorney to file all information. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the deni
-
L.A. Peek challenged his conviction for maintaining a nuisance in West Palm Beach's municipal court, arguing the court lacked legal existence because its judge was appointed by the city commission rather than elected by voters. The Florida Supreme Court upheld the municipal court
-
Edgar C. Frady sought a supersedeas (stay) of a circuit court order denying him bail while held on a murder indictment. The Florida Supreme Court denied the application, holding that granting a supersedeas would improperly reverse the lower court's bail determination before the w
-
The Florida Supreme Court reversed a lower court's decision denying a writ of habeas corpus, holding that the law under which the petitioner was convicted was unconstitutional. This decision effectively discharged the petitioner from custody.
-
The Florida Supreme Court held that a writ of error to review a habeas corpus judgment is discretionary and requires a petition detailing the case, not just a motion. This clarifies the procedural requirements for seeking such a writ.
-
2019 WL 10303104·
M.D. Fla.·
2025-05-28
·cited 1×
The court held that the petitioner's sole remaining habeas claim is procedurally defaulted and barred from federal review.
-
Fla. 3d DCA·
2023-10-18
·cited 1×
A habeas corpus petition based on appellate counsel's alleged ineffectiveness for failing to raise trial counsel's ineffectiveness claims lacks merit when the underlying ineffectiveness claim was already squarely rejected on direct appeal.
-
274 So. 3d 1136·
Fla. 5th DCA·
2019-04-18
·cited 1×
Verdicts finding a defendant guilty of robbery with a firearm or deadly weapon and finding the defendant did not possess an actual firearm are not truly inconsistent when the defendant threatened the victim with a firearm-looking weapon used in a manner likely to produce death or
-
215 So. 3d 1259·
Fla. 3d DCA·
2017-03-29
·cited 1×
Petitioner Jimenez sought habeas corpus relief from a resentencing order entered by the trial court before the appellate court's mandate issued. The court granted the petition because the trial court lacked jurisdiction to enter the resentencing order prior to the issuance of the
-
145 So. 3d 219·
Fla. 1st DCA·
2014-08-22
·cited 1×
The court held that an increase in the potential penalty faced by a defendant, due to the filing of more serious charges, can constitute a change in circumstances justifying an increase in bond.
-
107 So. 3d 1224·
Fla. 5th DCA·
2013-02-22
·cited 1×
-
The appellate court affirmed the denial of postconviction relief and dismissed a claim of ineffective appellate counsel. The court found the claim untimely and that the underlying issue, based on a now-receded supreme court decision, did not constitute a manifest injustice.
-
58 So. 3d 307·
Fla. 1st DCA·
2011-02-28
·cited 1×
-
9 So. 3d 58·
Fla. 4th DCA·
2009-03-27
·cited 1×
Habeas corpus petition granted and remanded because the trial court failed to consider appropriate pretrial release factors under Florida law when setting bond, despite the bond amount itself not being inherently problematic.
-
819 So. 2d 923·
Fla. 3d DCA·
2002-06-19
·cited 1×
-
114 F. Supp. 2d 1308·
M.D. Fla.·
2000-09-27
·cited 1×
The federal court dismissed the habeas corpus petition as untimely filed and procedurally barred, finding no exceptions to the bar.
-
The court held that the magistrate had jurisdiction, sufficient evidence supported probable cause, and the offense was extraditable under the treaty, thus denying the petition for writ of habeas corpus.
-
The court held that the government failed to use reasonable efforts to produce a confidential informant, violating the defendant's due process rights.