-
679 F.2d 381·
5th Cir.·
1982-06-21
·cited 93×
-
641 F.2d 392·
5th Cir.·
1981-04-03
·cited 32×
The court held that the petitioner's numerous complaints were without merit and affirmed the District Court's denial of his § 2254 petition.
-
323 F.3d 884·
11th Cir.·
2003-03-05
·cited 23×
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
-
689 F.2d 797·
8th Cir.·
1982-10-08
·cited 22×
The court held that the petitioner's video-taped statement was admissible because he initiated further communication with the police after invoking his right to counsel and knowingly and intelligently waived that right.
-
786 F.2d 697·
5th Cir.·
1986-04-07
·cited 20×
A federal court reviewing a state conviction via habeas corpus is limited to federal constitutional claims, and a guilty plea waives most preceding claims, including alleged defects in the indictment or lack of personal service.
-
926 F.2d 1554·
10th Cir.·
1991-03-05
·cited 17×
The court held that the loss of preliminary hearing tapes, the sealing of an affidavit, the submission of a second-degree murder instruction on an accessory theory, the admission of allegedly perjured testimony, and ineffective assistance of counsel did not violate the defendant'
-
881 F.2d 575·
8th Cir.·
1989-08-08
·cited 14×
The court held that the admission of accomplice testimony, sufficiency of evidence, and admission of autopsy photos and hearsay did not violate due process or constitutional rights, thus denying habeas relief.
-
609 F.2d 926·
9th Cir.·
1979-09-18
·cited 14×
The court affirmed the district court's denial of the petition for post-conviction relief, finding that the claims were barred by adequate and independent state procedural grounds or lacked merit.
-
880 F.2d 670·
2d Cir.·
1989-07-24
·cited 10×
The court held that even if the trial court erred in limiting cross-examination, the error was harmless because the defendant failed to make an offer of proof regarding the relevance of the excluded questions and his trial counsel's actions obscured the intended purpose of the in
-
800 F.2d 437·
4th Cir.·
1986-09-16
·cited 8×
The court held that while the police procedures in administering hypnosis were flawed, the identification of the defendant was sufficiently reliable apart from the hypnosis, rendering the error harmless.
-
934 F.2d 295·
11th Cir.·
1991-06-24
·cited 6×
The court held that the petitioner's claim was not procedurally barred because the state court did not clearly and expressly state that its judgment rested on a state procedural bar, and the state failed to demonstrate prejudice from the delay in filing the petition.
-
715 F.2d 1217·
7th Cir.·
1983-08-25
·cited 6×
The court held that the petitioner's thirty-two month delay between charge and arrest did not violate his Sixth Amendment right to a speedy trial.
-
891 F.2d 629·
7th Cir.·
1989-12-14
·cited 4×
The court held that the petitioner was not denied effective assistance of counsel and affirmed the district court's denial of the habeas corpus petition.
-
853 F.2d 1340·
6th Cir.·
1988-08-10
·cited 4×
The court held that the prosecutor's comments were not manifestly intended to reflect the accused's silence and would not naturally and necessarily be understood as such by the jury.
-
840 F.2d 1201·
5th Cir.·
1988-03-17
·cited 4×
The dissenting judge would reverse the lower court's decision and hold that a jury trial is mandated in driving while intoxicated cases.
-
929 F.2d 1294·
8th Cir.·
1991-04-09
·cited 2×
The court held that the district court did not err in denying the petition for a writ of habeas corpus, affirming the denial of relief on all claims.
-
903 F.2d 534·
8th Cir.·
1990-05-09
·cited 2×
The court held that a defendant in state court can validly waive their Sixth Amendment right to conflict-free counsel without an on-the-record inquiry, provided the waiver is knowing, voluntary, and intelligent.
-
11th Cir.·
2026-08-04
The state appellate court did not unreasonably apply Faretta v. California when it determined that Curry never clearly and unequivocally invoked her right to self-representation, as Curry's statements were equivocal and she vacillated between requesting self-representation and re
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-12-17
The court held that Grounds One through Three are procedurally barred due to failure to exhaust state remedies and failure to "federalize" the claims. Ground Four, alleging ineffective assistance of counsel, was not granted as the applicant failed to show the state court's decisi
-
S.D. Fla.·
2023-08-10
The court held that the petitioner's claims of ineffective assistance of counsel regarding his decision to testify and a rejected plea offer were without merit, and the cumulative error claim also failed.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2023-08-07
The federal court denied the habeas corpus application because the state court's decision was not contrary to or an unreasonable application of federal law, and the applicant's claims were either procedurally barred or meritless.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2023-05-10
The court held that the petitioner's claims were procedurally defaulted or meritless, and the state court's decisions were not contrary to or an unreasonable application of federal law.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2023-03-08
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, nor based on an unreasonable determination of the facts.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2022-10-03
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.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2022-07-20
Rufus Young challenged his murder and armed robbery convictions on federal habeas review, arguing his trial counsel was ineffective in three ways: failing to adequately suppress an allegedly illegal arrest, failing to advise him of an independent act defense, and failing to objec
-
M.D. Fla.·
2022-05-20
Christopher Dean Thomas challenged a 2010 Duval County conviction for four counts of armed robbery through a federal habeas petition, raising claims of ineffective assistance of trial counsel, Brady violations, and newly discovered evidence. The federal district court denied the
-
M.D. Fla.·
2022-04-19
Marcus Robinson, convicted in state court of second-degree murder and sentenced to 45 years in prison, challenged his conviction through federal habeas corpus on grounds of ineffective assistance of counsel, claiming his attorney failed to investigate and advise him of a self-def
-
M.D. Fla.·
2022-02-17
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 and was based on a reasonable determination of the facts.
-
N.D. Fla.·
2021-10-12
Joey Smelley sought federal habeas relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2254, challenging his convictions for home invasion robbery and other felonies based on claims that his trial and collateral counsel were ineffective. The District Court for the Northern District of Florida denied the pe
-
M.D. Fla.·
2021-08-03
Howard James Jackson, a Florida prisoner convicted of attempted murder in the first degree, petitioned for federal habeas corpus relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2254, raising nine grounds based on claims of ineffective assistance of counsel related to his guilty plea. The U.S. District
-
M.D. Fla.·
2020-02-28
The court held that the petitioner failed to establish that the state court's denial of his claims was contrary to or an unreasonable application of federal law, or based on an unreasonable determination of facts.
-
932 F.2d 676·
7th Cir.·
1991-05-16
A trial court's decision to instruct the jury not to draw adverse inferences from a defendant's failure to testify, even over the defendant's objection, does not violate the Fifth Amendment or the Due Process Clause.