Habeas Corpus Relief

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

• Cabbler v. Superintendent, Va. State Penitentiary
  528 F.2d 1142· 4th Cir.· 1975-12-08 ·cited 16×
  The court held that impounding a vehicle after arresting the driver away from home, and conducting an inventory search of its contents, is reasonable under the Fourth Amendment when done for safekeeping or to remove a nuisance.
• Floyd v. Henderson
  456 F.2d 1117· 5th Cir.· 1972-03-17 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the Attorney General has the power to designate a federal prisoner's confinement location, and transferring a prisoner for concurrent service does not waive federal jurisdiction.
• Wallace v. Hocker
  441 F.2d 219· 9th Cir.· 1971-04-13 ·cited 16×·via Habeas Corpus Proceedings
  A defendant's inculpatory statements cannot be presented to a jury unless they have been found voluntary by a separate tribunal, requiring a preliminary determination by the trial judge.
• The State of Fla. on the relation of Rene Evans Paine, Jr. v. Paine
  166 So. 2d 708· Fla. 3d DCA· 1964-06-23 ·cited 16×·via Habeas Corpus Proceedings
  A former husband appealed an order awarding attorney's fees to his ex-wife in a habeas corpus proceeding over child custody. The court reversed, holding that statutory authority to award attorney's fees under § 65.16, Fla.Stat. applies only to proceedings enforcing alimony or chi
• United States ex rel. Paul Crump v. Sain
  295 F.2d 699· 7th Cir.· 1961-10-16 ·cited 16×·via Habeas Corpus Proceedings
  The court held that the district court's finding that the relator's confession was voluntary was not clearly erroneous, and thus affirmed the dismissal of the habeas corpus petition.
• Freedman v. Looney
  210 F.2d 56· 10th Cir.· 1954-01-26 ·cited 16×·via Habeas Corpus Proceedings
  The court held that the Parole Board did not abuse its discretion in revoking the petitioner's conditional release based on his conviction for a misdemeanor.
• Bruzaud v. Matthews
  207 F.2d 25· D.C. Cir.· 1953-07-16 ·cited 16×·via Habeas Corpus Review
  The court held that a discrepancy in dates between an affidavit and an indictment does not invalidate the indictment for extradition purposes, and conflicting evidence regarding the fugitive status is insufficient to warrant discharge on habeas corpus.
• Application of Murra
  166 F.2d 605· 7th Cir.· 1948-02-11 ·cited 16×·via Habeas Corpus Proceedings
  The court held that Rule 52 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, requiring findings of fact and conclusions of law, is applicable to naturalization proceedings heard in open court.
• Martin v. State OF Ala. & Cir. Court of Russell Cnty.
  730 F.2d 721· 11th Cir.· 1984-04-23 ·cited 15×·via Habeas Corpus Review
  The court held that the evidence presented was insufficient to prove a sale of marijuana by the petitioner, as mere presence and an informant placing money in the pocket does not constitute a sale.
• In re Louie L. Wainwright
  678 F.2d 951· 11th Cir.· 1982-06-14 ·cited 15×·via Habeas Corpus Proceedings
  The court held that a writ of prohibition is not warranted to prevent a district court from conducting an evidentiary hearing in a habeas corpus proceeding.
• Turner v. Estelle
  515 F.2d 853· 5th Cir.· 1975-07-09 ·cited 15×·via Habeas Corpus Review
  The court held that the petitioner's conviction for robbery by assault was not overturned on the grounds that the state failed to afford him a speedy trial.
• Robert E. Banks v. Jones
  197 So. 3d 1152· Fla. 1st DCA· 2016-07-12 ·cited 14×·via Habeas Corpus Review
  A state prisoner challenges his assignment to Close Management (solitary confinement) after spitting in a psychiatrist's face. The court recedes from prior precedent holding that such challenges must be brought as habeas corpus petitions, ruling instead that Close Management assi
• Hall v. State
  690 So. 2d 754· Fla. 5th DCA· 1997-04-04 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the defendant's challenges to his 1990 sentences were legally insufficient and constituted an abuse of process.
• Hernando Williams v. Chrans
  945 F.2d 926· 7th Cir.· 1991-10-01 ·cited 14×
  The court affirmed the district court's denial of the habeas petition, finding no constitutional infirmities in the guilty plea or the Illinois death penalty statute as applied.
• Bates v. McCAUGHTRY
  934 F.2d 99· 7th Cir.· 1991-05-30 ·cited 14×·via Habeas Corpus Review
  The court held that a federal court cannot grant habeas corpus relief based on a state court's interpretation of state law, even if the interpretation is claimed to be erroneous.
• Clisby v. Jones
  907 F.2d 1047· 11th Cir.· 1990-07-25 ·cited 14×
  The state fulfills its constitutional obligation under Ake v. Oklahoma by providing a competent, licensed psychiatrist, and is not liable for potential malpractice by that psychiatrist.
• Russell v. Lynaugh
  892 F.2d 1205· 5th Cir.· 1989-12-08 ·cited 14×·via Habeas Corpus Review
  The court affirmed the denial of habeas corpus relief, agreeing that the issue was procedurally barred and that the venireman's exclusion was proper on the merits.
• Lange v. Young
  869 F.2d 1008· 7th Cir.· 1989-02-15 ·cited 14×·via Habeas Corpus Review
  The court held that Wisconsin's limitation on the attorney-client privilege, allowing a psychiatrist retained by the defense to testify for the prosecution, does not violate the Sixth Amendment right to counsel, and that any evidentiary errors were harmless.
• Martin v. Demma
  831 F.2d 69· 5th Cir.· 1987-10-28 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the date of receipt of the complaint by the clerk, not the formal filing date, governs the commencement of an action for statute of limitations purposes.
• King v. Lynaugh
  828 F.2d 257· 5th Cir.· 1987-09-14 ·cited 14×
• Dewayne Hulsey v. Sargent
  821 F.2d 469· 8th Cir.· 1987-06-12 ·cited 14×·via Habeas Corpus Review
  The court held that the sentencing phase must be remanded for reconsideration in light of Wainwright v. Witt, but affirmed the district court's denial of relief on other claims.
• Mosley v. Captain Moran
  798 F.2d 182· 7th Cir.· 1986-08-04 ·cited 14×·via Federal Habeas Corpus Relief
  The court held that the Illinois statute, as construed, does not require the Prisoner Review Board to review revocations of 'good time' credits, only 'good conduct' credits. Therefore, Mosley's claim for habeas relief based on the lack of such review fails.
• Burdette Woods v. Clusen
  794 F.2d 293· 7th Cir.· 1986-06-25 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the police tactics employed during the interrogation of a juvenile suspect violated his Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment rights, rendering his confession involuntary.
• Sheik Abdel Rahim Ahmad v. Redman
  782 F.2d 409· 3d Cir.· 1986-01-27 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the state failed to establish a knowing and intelligent waiver of Miranda rights by the petitioner.
• Fuson v. A.R. Jago
  773 F.2d 55· 6th Cir.· 1985-09-11 ·cited 14×·via Habeas Corpus Review
  The admission of a deceased codefendant's custodial confession, which incriminated the petitioner, violated the petitioner's Sixth Amendment right to confrontation because the statement did not fall under a valid hearsay exception and was not harmless error.
• Watson v. Blackburn
  756 F.2d 1055· 5th Cir.· 1985-03-18 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the petitioner failed to make a substantial showing of the denial of a federal right, thus denying his application for a stay of execution and certificate of probable cause.
• Kerr v. Finkbeiner
  757 F.2d 604· 4th Cir.· 1985-03-18 ·cited 14×
  A violation of the Interstate Agreement on Detainers Act's (IADA) 180-day speedy trial provision is not a fundamental defect entitling a prisoner to habeas corpus relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 unless prejudice is shown.
• Strahan v. Blackburn
  750 F.2d 438· 5th Cir.· 1985-01-14 ·cited 14×·via Habeas Corpus Proceedings
  A federal habeas corpus petition may be dismissed under Rule 9(a) if the state demonstrates prejudice due to the petitioner's delay in filing, and the petitioner cannot show diligence or grounds for the delay.
• Farras v. United States
  744 F.2d 37· 6th Cir.· 1984-09-20 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the Parole Commission's substantive decisions to grant or deny parole are committed to agency discretion and are not subject to judicial review, and that the parole guidelines do not violate the PCRA or improperly intrude on sentencing functions.
• Wilson v. Hon. Robert J. Henderson
  742 F.2d 741· 2d Cir.· 1984-08-27 ·cited 14×·via Habeas Corpus Review
  The court held that the government informant did not elicit inculpatory statements from the appellant, and the lower courts' findings to this effect were supported by the record.
• Piankhy v. Cuyler
  703 F.2d 728· 3d Cir.· 1983-03-29 ·cited 14×·via Habeas Corpus Review
  The court held that the trial court did not sufficiently inform the defendant of his right to counsel and the dangers of self-representation, thus the waiver was not knowing and intelligent.
• Tyronne J. Mitchell v. Maggio
  679 F.2d 77· 5th Cir.· 1982-06-25 ·cited 14×
  The court held that an attorney's status as a part-time city prosecutor does not inherently create an actual conflict of interest violating the Sixth Amendment when representing a defendant in state court, absent proof of divided loyalties or adverse attorney-client relationships
• Stacy v. Love
  679 F.2d 1209· 6th Cir.· 1982-06-03 ·cited 14×·via Habeas Corpus Review
  The court held that the evidence presented at trial was insufficient to support a finding of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, entitling the petitioner to habeas corpus relief.
• Lupe Hernandez Silva v. Estelle
  672 F.2d 457· 5th Cir.· 1982-04-05 ·cited 14×·via Federal Habeas Corpus Relief
  A confession obtained after a defendant invoked his right to counsel, even if readvised of his rights, is inadmissible.
• White v. Estelle
  669 F.2d 973· 5th Cir.· 1982-03-08 ·cited 14×·via Habeas Corpus Proceedings
  The court held that the federal habeas review standard for a state court jury's competency verdict is whether any rational trier of fact could conclude the evidence does not predominate in favor of incompetence, viewing evidence favorably to the verdict.
• McGAHEE v. Massey
  667 F.2d 1357· 11th Cir.· 1982-02-16 ·cited 14×·via Habeas Corpus Review
  A defendant who testifies on the merits of his case waives his Fifth Amendment right to remain silent, allowing the prosecution to comment on his failure to deny incriminating facts.
• Bennie E. Demps v. Louie L. Wainwright
  666 F.2d 224· 5th Cir.· 1982-01-22 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the use of a deposition at trial, even if it violated the Confrontation Clause, was harmless error beyond a reasonable doubt due to overwhelming evidence of guilt. The denial of severance was not an abuse of discretion.
• Solomon v. Smith
  645 F.2d 1179· 2d Cir.· 1981-02-26 ·cited 14×·via Habeas Corpus Review
  The court held that the identification procedures were not impermissibly suggestive and did not violate due process, and therefore habeas corpus relief was not warranted.
• Hooper v. Perini
  641 F.2d 445· 6th Cir.· 1981-02-17 ·cited 14×
  The court held that even if the jury instruction improperly placed the burden of proof on the defendant for self-defense, the error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt given the overwhelming evidence of guilt.
• Franklin v. Fenton
  642 F.2d 760· 3d Cir.· 1980-10-21 ·cited 14×
  The Parole Commission's actions in withdrawing, reissuing, and holding warrants in abeyance pending disposition of criminal charges were permissible under the relevant statutes and regulations. A duplicate warrant issued after the expiration of a parole term is valid if the origi
• Brown v. Jernigan
  622 F.2d 914· 5th Cir.· 1980-08-01 ·cited 14×·via Habeas Corpus Review
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying the habeas petition, as the petitioner's guilty plea was voluntary and knowing, and other claims lacked merit.
• United States v. Milestone
  626 F.2d 264· 3d Cir.· 1980-06-30 ·cited 14×·via Habeas Corpus Review
  The court held that deleting language from an indictment to conform to the prosecution's election of theories does not constitute an amendment requiring grand jury approval if the remaining language still states an offense and does not broaden the charges.
• Sena v. Romero
  617 F.2d 579· 10th Cir.· 1980-03-19 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the trial court erred by placing the burden of proof on the petitioner to show his guilty plea was involuntary, when the record was silent and the burden should have shifted to the government.
• Rundlett v. Oliver
  607 F.2d 495· 1st Cir.· 1979-08-01 ·cited 14×
  The court upholds the Maine statute, finding that the gaps noted in a prior case have been filled by the present record, allowing for a plausible legislative purpose that meets heightened scrutiny for sex-based classifications.
• Allison v. Gray
  603 F.2d 633· 7th Cir.· 1979-07-30 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the exclusion of alibi evidence under an unconstitutional statute was not harmless error beyond a reasonable doubt.
• United States ex rel. James A. Greene v. State OF NEW Jersey
  519 F.2d 1356· 3d Cir.· 1975-07-17 ·cited 14×·via Habeas Corpus Review
  The court held that the state trial court's failure to conduct a voir dire examination after prejudicial mid-trial publicity, despite ruling the publicity would not affect the jury, violated the defendant's Sixth Amendment right to an impartial jury.
• W. T v. State OF Ala.
  466 F.2d 507· 5th Cir.· 1972-08-15 ·cited 14×
  The court held that dismissal of the petitioner's claim for daily medical attention and medication was improper, but affirmed dismissal of claims seeking transfer to a specific institution.
• Fulford v. Smith
  432 F.2d 1225· 5th Cir.· 1970-10-30 ·cited 14×
  The court held that a state prisoner's petition for federal habeas relief, alleging suppression of evidence, was properly denied without a hearing because the prisoner had previously raised similar claims, the evidence presented did not support the allegations, and the prisoner h
• Palomera v. Taylor
  344 F.2d 937· 10th Cir.· 1965-05-03 ·cited 14×·via Habeas Corpus Review
  The court held that civil courts' review of military convictions via habeas corpus is limited to jurisdiction and lawful power, not re-evaluation of evidence or procedural errors outside that scope.
• United States ex rel. Edgar I. Shott, Jr. v. Tehan
  337 F.2d 990· 6th Cir.· 1964-11-10 ·cited 14×·via Habeas Corpus Proceedings
  The court held that a state prosecutor's comment on a defendant's failure to testify violates the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination, which is applicable to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment.