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
-
583 F.2d 1161·
10th Cir.·
1978-09-20
·cited 27×
Federal courts are not precluded from considering Fourth Amendment claims in habeas corpus proceedings if state courts failed to recognize or apply controlling constitutional standards, such as those in Brown v. Illinois.
-
Matera appeals a circuit court's denial of his habeas corpus petition challenging a $250,000 bail as excessive. The appellate court holds that under Florida's Constitution, the bail amount was indeed excessive and amounted to a denial of bail for a non-capital felony, reversing t
-
The Sixth Amendment right to counsel is fundamental and requires an affirmative, knowing, intelligent, and voluntary waiver. The temporary absence of counsel during a critical stage of trial, such as the taking of evidence, is a structural defect requiring automatic reversal unle
-
The court held that there was sufficient evidence to support the defendant's convictions for possession with intent to distribute cocaine and conspiracy to distribute cocaine, and that the jury instructions did not contain plain error.
-
Noncompliance with a state contemporaneous-objection rule bars federal habeas review absent a showing of cause and prejudice; the identification was reliable despite suggestive procedures.
-
The court held that due process requires prison disciplinary committees to make a good faith inquiry into the reliability of confidential informants when imposing severe sanctions, and the record must reflect this inquiry.
-
666 F.2d 966·
5th Cir.·
1982-02-04
·cited 26×
The court held that Florida Statute § 782.11 is not unconstitutionally vague and that sufficient evidence supported the conviction for unnecessary killing.
-
605 F.2d 947·
6th Cir.·
1979-09-20
·cited 26×
The court held that the district court correctly granted habeas corpus relief because the trial court's handling of during-trial prejudicial publicity deprived the petitioner of his constitutional right to a fair trial by an impartial jury.
-
The court held that a federal habeas corpus court cannot relitigate a Fourth Amendment claim if the state provided an opportunity for full and fair litigation, even if the federal court disagrees with the state court's factual findings.
-
527 F.2d 109·
8th Cir.·
1975-12-08
·cited 26×
A guilty plea induced by a belief of a specific sentence, especially when combined with claims of coercion, is involuntary if that belief is not unreasonable and not properly addressed by the court.
-
517 F.2d 1114·
8th Cir.·
1975-06-04
·cited 26×
-
493 F.2d 37·
5th Cir.·
1974-04-26
·cited 26×
A federal court cannot grant habeas relief based on a state court's interpretation of state law, even if that interpretation differs from federal precedent.
-
In this custody case, the appellate court addressed a trial judge's refusal to comply with the court's mandate awarding custody of a minor child to her biological father. The court held that a trial judge has no discretion to reject or delay implementing an appellate court's mand
-
The court held that the military had jurisdiction over the appellant and that his claims of unconstitutionality and denial of due process were matters for military courts to resolve, not federal habeas corpus.
-
The Court held that an uncoerced statement following Miranda warnings establishes an implied waiver of the right to remain silent, and that a suspect must unambiguously invoke this right to cease questioning.
-
Mars Gore was convicted of the murder, kidnapping, and robbery of Susan Roark in 1990 and sentenced to death. On federal habeas review under 28 U.S.C. § 2254, Gore challenged the trial court's denial of his motion to suppress statements he made to Metro-Dade Detective Simmons dur
-
The Florida Supreme Court established a procedural rule for capital appeals, holding that it will not accept pro se filings from represented defendants that contain claims of ineffective assistance of appellate counsel, requests to dismiss counsel, or supplemental bases for relie
-
The court held that the offenses charged were within the extradition treaty and that there was sufficient evidence to establish probable cause for extradition, affirming the denial of the habeas corpus petition.
-
819 F.2d 395·
3d Cir.·
1987-05-18
·cited 25×
The court held that the prisoner's claim for restoration of good-time credits is cognizable only under habeas corpus, not § 1983, and that he failed to exhaust state remedies. Furthermore, the prisoner lacks standing to seek prospective relief.
-
The court held that the defendant's constitutional right to be present at critical stages of the trial was violated when he was excluded from an in camera juror disqualification hearing.
-
A violation of the Interstate Agreement on Detainers (IAD) timely trial provisions constitutes an exceptional circumstance requiring federal habeas corpus relief, but the prisoner waived his rights by agreeing to continuances.
-
The court held that the petitioner's confession was voluntary and that the admission of his statements did not violate Miranda, affirming the denial of his habeas petition.
-
A mail fraud conviction based on a scheme that demonstrably caused monetary loss to the victim, even if also charged under an invalidated 'honest services' theory, can be sustained.
-
The court held that the evidence presented was insufficient to establish a prima facie case of grand jury discrimination based on gender.
-
The majority's requirement of double jeopardy waiver is pointless and rests on incorrect assumptions about double jeopardy law when a plea bargain is breached.
-
The court held that the in-court identification was not impermissibly suggestive, but remanded the ineffective assistance of counsel claim for an evidentiary hearing due to unresolved factual issues.
-
706 F.2d 1534·
11th Cir.·
1983-06-13
·cited 24×
The court affirmed the denial of habeas corpus relief, finding petitioner's claims without merit, but remanded to the district court to consider the effects of a pending Supreme Court decision.
-
The failure of a state court to instruct the jury on lesser included offenses is cognizable on habeas corpus, but procedural noncompliance can bar review if not plain error. The evidence was sufficient to support the murder conviction.
-
The court held that while joint representation is disfavored, the defendant did not suffer sufficient particularized prejudice to warrant a finding of unconstitutional denial of effective assistance of counsel.
-
The court held that even if the prosecutor's comment on the defendant's silence was improper, it was rendered harmless beyond a reasonable doubt by the trial judge's thorough jury instructions on the defendant's right not to testify.
-
The court held that the 1967 Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees did not substantively alter the existing U.S. immigration scheme, did not create new rights or entitlements for aliens, and did not invalidate INS procedures for determining refugee status.
-
The court held that prosecutorial remarks during summation, when viewed in context and considering defense provocation, did not violate the defendant's Sixth Amendment right to counsel or deny due process, and thus habeas corpus was improperly granted.
-
535 F.2d 730·
2d Cir.·
1976-05-10
·cited 24×
The court held that the guilty plea was valid under Rule 11, but the parole revocation was unconstitutional due to lack of notice for one of the grounds.
-
The court held that the judge's participation in the trial did not violate the mandatory disqualification statute or constitutional standards, and that the district court did not err in denying an evidentiary hearing or limiting discovery.
-
A confession obtained after an illegal arrest, without proper warnings or opportunity to consult counsel, is tainted and inadmissible as 'fruit of the poisonous tree'. Evidence seized during a warrantless search lacking clear and convincing proof of valid consent is also inadmiss
-
485 F.2d 1186·
5th Cir.·
1973-09-14
·cited 24×
A defendant's Sixth Amendment right to a speedy trial is violated by inordinate and unjustified prosecutorial delay, regardless of actual prejudice to the defense, especially when the defendant actively asserts the right.
-
450 F.2d 465·
5th Cir.·
1971-10-28
·cited 24×
The court held that a six-year delay in prosecution, where the defendant was incarcerated and available to the state, constituted a denial of the right to a speedy trial, and the defendant demonstrated sufficient prejudice to shift the burden to the state.
-
The court held that the admission of a co-defendant's confession without redaction, coupled with insufficient evidence and ineffective limiting instructions, violated the petitioner's Sixth Amendment right to confrontation, as applied to the states through the Fourteenth Amendmen
-
The court held that the per curiam opinion's observations disparaging the petitioner's case were ill-advised and could prejudice the upcoming hearing.
-
The court held that a prior adjudication of issues in a habeas corpus proceeding may be given controlling weight, even if res judicata does not strictly apply.
-
Perry Alexander Taylor was convicted in 1989 of first-degree murder and sexual battery in the brutal killing of Geraldine Birch and sentenced to death. On federal habeas review, Taylor challenged the trial court's exclusion of testimony from the victim's sisters regarding her pri
-
Wyon Dale Childers was convicted of bribery and unlawful compensation for official behavior based largely on testimony from Willie Junior, a co-conspirator who entered a plea agreement with the State. Childers sought to cross-examine Junior about the Elliot acquittal and a Notice
-
Robert Hart was convicted of two murders and armed robbery based primarily on a taped confession obtained after he signed a Miranda waiver form. The Eleventh Circuit granted habeas relief, holding that Hart's waiver was involuntary and not made with full awareness of his rights b
-
-
The court held that the district court did not err in denying the habeas corpus petition, affirming the denial of relief to the state prisoner.
-
658 F.2d 406·
5th Cir.·
1981-10-08
·cited 23×
The court held that the defendant's inculpatory statements, made after a polygraph examiner falsely told him he failed the test and engaged in interrogation without proper warnings or counsel, were not voluntary and should have been suppressed.
-
656 F.2d 986·
5th Cir.·
1981-09-21
·cited 23×
Failure to object to a magistrate's report and recommendations before the district court accepts them constitutes a waiver of the right to appeal the district court's judgment based on that report.
-
632 F.2d 1261·
5th Cir.·
1980-12-17
·cited 23×
The court held that a voluntary and intelligent guilty plea breaks the chain of prior constitutional claims, and therefore, the denial of habeas corpus relief was proper.
-
921 So. 2d 692·
Fla. 1st DCA·
2006-02-03
·cited 22×
Chester Dyson seeks habeas corpus relief contending that the $25,000 and $10,000 bonds set for his burglary and robbery charges are effectively no bond due to his inability to pay them. The court denies relief, holding that a defendant's inability to meet a bond amount does not a
-
The Eleventh Circuit held that the filing fee requirements of the Prison Litigation Reform Act of 1995 do not apply to habeas corpus proceedings under 28 U.S.C. §§ 2254 and 2255. Although habeas corpus proceedings are technically civil in nature, they are hybrid actions sui gener