452 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 1,220 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort
-
The court held that even though constitutional errors occurred during the trial, they were harmless beyond a reasonable doubt because the evidence of guilt was overwhelming.
-
667 F.2d 274·
2d Cir.·
1981-12-15
·cited 43×
A state court's constitutional error at trial can warrant federal habeas relief, even considering principles of comity and finality.
-
A jury instruction creating a burden-shifting presumption of intent violates due process and requires federal habeas relief, even if not objected to at trial, provided the petitioner can show cause for the failure to object.
-
The Eleventh Circuit affirmed the denial of Mungin's habeas petition, holding that two ineffective assistance of counsel claims failed on the merits and two were barred by the statute of limitations.
-
826 F.2d 747·
8th Cir.·
1987-08-14
·cited 42×
The court affirmed the denial of the habeas petition, finding no constitutional error in the admission of evidence or jury instructions, and sufficient evidence for the conviction.
-
651 F.2d 480·
7th Cir.·
1981-06-10
·cited 42×
The dissenting judge argues that the state trial court's use of Instruction No. 5 impermissibly shifted the burden of proof on an essential element of the crime, and the admission of the defendant's request to speak to a lawyer was prejudicial error.
-
531 F.2d 1167·
2d Cir.·
1976-03-16
·cited 42×
The court held that the evidence seized was the product of a constitutional search, and therefore the dismissal of the habeas corpus petition was proper.
-
A prisoner denied parole eligibility due to subsequent convictions is considered 'in custody' for federal habeas corpus purposes, allowing a collateral attack on those convictions.
-
758 F.2d 373·
9th Cir.·
1985-04-16
·cited 41×
The court held that the petitioner failed to demonstrate ineffective assistance of counsel or a constitutional violation from the admission of evidence, thus affirming the dismissal of his habeas petition.
-
623 F.2d 1098·
5th Cir.·
1980-08-14
·cited 41×
The court held that the evidence presented was sufficient to establish probable cause for extradition, and that the petitioners' arguments regarding the political offense exception, the extradition of nationals, and humanitarian concerns were without merit.
-
The court held that claims not exhausted in state courts must be remanded for dismissal, while claims previously decided on direct appeal and found not to raise constitutional issues are affirmed.
-
The court held that the district court erred in denying habeas corpus relief without considering the merits, as the petitioner may be able to show cause and prejudice for his failure to raise a jury composition claim at trial.
-
632 F.2d 353·
4th Cir.·
1980-10-02
·cited 40×
The court held that the prosecutor's repeated references to the defendant's postarrest silence, used to impeach his alibi defense, constituted a constitutional violation that was not harmless error. The court also found that the contemporaneous objection rule did not preclude rev
-
The court held that evidentiary rulings, jury instructions, and sufficiency of evidence claims do not present constitutional issues cognizable on federal habeas corpus review.
-
A petitioner's failure to file a state collateral relief petition within the time limit constitutes a procedural default, requiring a showing of cause and prejudice to consider federal habeas claims.
-
The court held that the record was insufficient to determine if Hitchcock error was harmless, and thus, a remand for an evidentiary hearing was necessary.
-
The court held that the Mississippi Supreme Court's procedural bar was not adequate and independent, allowing federal review of the Eighth Amendment claim, and that the petitioner was competent to stand trial.
-
772 F.2d 1410·
7th Cir.·
1985-09-13
·cited 38×
The court held that even if the prosecutor's question was impermissible, the error was harmless because the trial court sustained the objection and instructed the jury that the defendant had no obligation to speak.
-
The court held that the district court correctly conducted an independent inquiry into the constitutional validity of a state search warrant, irrespective of prior state court rulings, and that the affidavit supporting the warrant met constitutional standards. The court also foun
-
Federal courts must apply state procedural waiver rules in habeas corpus proceedings unless the petitioner demonstrates actual prejudice from the alleged constitutional violation.
-
The court held that the issue of whether a conflict of interest arose during trial, depriving the petitioner of effective counsel, had not been fully and fairly presented to the South Dakota courts and therefore remanded for further proceedings in the state court.
-
796 F.2d 598·
3d Cir.·
1986-06-26
·cited 37×
The court held that the majority opinion failed to consider the totality of circumstances in determining the voluntariness of the confession, selectively using facts and ignoring evidence of coercion.
-
459 F.3d 1217·
11th Cir.·
2006-08-11
·cited 36×
Richard Henyard was convicted in 1994 of carjacking Dorothy Lewis and her two children, murdering the children (Jasmine, age 3, and Jamilya, age 7), and raping and attempting to murder Dorothy Lewis. He was sentenced to death. On federal habeas review under 28 U.S.C. § 2254, Heny
-
-
A federal court may not consider a habeas claim that a state prisoner has waived by failing to raise it in state court proceedings, absent a showing of 'cause' for the failure and 'prejudice' resulting therefrom.
-
657 F.2d 1017·
9th Cir.·
1981-09-10
·cited 36×
The court held that the Lanterman-Petris-Short Act's provisions allowing 14-day involuntary commitment without a mandatory probable cause hearing violate the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The court also affirmed the district court's injunctive relief.
-
The court held that the petitioner failed to establish sufficient cause for not challenging a juror for cause or using a peremptory challenge, and thus could not raise the issue on federal habeas corpus. The court also held that the pretrial publicity did not render the jury impa
-
The court held that the conviction for operating a motor vehicle to avoid arrest was obtained in violation of due process due to a fundamentally unfair trial stemming from lack of notice regarding the essential elements of the offense. The court abstained from ruling on the doubl
-
The court affirmed the district court's orders releasing petitioners, holding that their claims for good behavior time credit were properly considered under the habeas corpus statute, which requires exhaustion of state remedies.
-
The court held that exceptional circumstances, including significant delay and prior federal court involvement, warranted the District Court deciding the voluntariness of the petitioner's confessions, despite the general rule of exhausting state remedies.
-
The court held that inordinate delay in adjudicating a state post-conviction remedy can constitute a denial of due process, entitling a petitioner to federal habeas corpus relief.
-
The court held that while the exhaustion doctrine is rooted in comity, federal courts must intervene when state remedies are demonstrably ineffective or absent. A petitioner's failure to appeal a state court denial, especially when acting without counsel or under a misunderstandi
-
321 F.3d 1304·
11th Cir.·
2003-02-19
·cited 35×
The dissenting judge argues that the majority incorrectly applied the Batson framework by conflating its steps and improperly heightening the prosecution's burden of production. The dissent asserts that the prosecution met its minimal burden at Batson's step two by articulating f
-
832 F.2d 1528·
11th Cir.·
1987-11-13
·cited 35×
The court held that federal courts should proceed to the merits of a Lockett claim if Florida courts have indicated they will not apply procedural default rules to such claims.
-
The district court erred in denying the habeas corpus petition and stay of execution, and its judgment must be reversed and remanded for proper consideration of the constitutional issues.
-
-
741 F.2d 1007·
7th Cir.·
1984-08-16
·cited 35×
The court held that the district court correctly denied the habeas corpus petition, finding no constitutional error in the state court proceedings regarding competency, sufficiency of evidence, or evidentiary rulings.
-
639 F.2d 1115·
5th Cir.·
1981-03-16
·cited 35×
The court held that the appellant established a prima facie case of racial discrimination in jury selection, and the state failed to rebut this case.
-
The court held that a federal habeas corpus petition was properly dismissed without prejudice for failure to exhaust state remedies, as indicated by the petitioner's own response on the application form.
-
Juan Carlos Chavez, a death row inmate scheduled for execution, appealed the district court's denial of his request for appointment of counsel to investigate and litigate claims based on Martinez v. Ryan. The Eleventh Circuit affirmed the denial, holding that Martinez creates onl
-
623 F.3d 1331·
11th Cir.·
2010-10-18
·cited 34×
Gregory Alan Kokal was convicted of first-degree murder and sentenced to death for the 1983 killing of Jeffrey Russell, a Navy sailor, during a robbery. Kokal claimed on federal habeas review that his trial counsel was constitutionally ineffective under the Sixth Amendment for fa
-
The court held that the petitioner's escape does not automatically waive his right to federal habeas review for claims not reviewable on direct appeal, and that the state court's denial of coram nobis on the merits, not procedural grounds, means the federal court can review the c
-
817 F.2d 412·
7th Cir.·
1987-04-28
·cited 34×
A federal court cannot hold that a state court misunderstood state law, as state courts' interpretations define state law for federal purposes. A failure to follow state law does not automatically violate the Constitution.
-
809 F.2d 1487·
11th Cir.·
1987-02-13
·cited 34×
The court held that a confession obtained after an illegal arrest is admissible if the taint of the arrest is sufficiently attenuated by intervening circumstances, and that a suspect's subjective belief of immunity, absent police misrepresentation, does not render a Miranda waive
-
-
687 F.2d 885·
7th Cir.·
1982-03-26
·cited 34×
The court is compelled to concur in directing the writ to issue, finding no indication that the defendant initiated contact with officers after requesting counsel.
-
The court held that a prosecutor's racially inflammatory remarks during closing arguments in a rape trial so infected the proceedings with unfairness as to deny the defendants due process of law.
-
The court held that the petitioner had exhausted his state remedies, either through prior rulings or due to circumstances rendering the state process ineffective, and thus was entitled to federal habeas corpus relief.
-
The court held that the denial of a continuance, which prevented defense counsel from adequately preparing for trial, amounted to a denial of the Sixth Amendment right to effective assistance of counsel.
-
478 F.2d 684·
8th Cir.·
1973-04-25
·cited 34×
The Court held that the 1908 Act did not diminish the exterior boundaries of the Cheyenne River Indian Reservation, and therefore Eagle Butte remained within Indian Country, making the state without jurisdiction.