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 affirmed the denial of federal habeas corpus relief, finding the in-court identification was independent of any potentially suggestive pretrial photographic identification.
-
A guilty plea waives all prior constitutional claims, precluding federal habeas corpus review of those claims.
-
The court held that the appellant's guilty pleas were valid under pre-Boykin standards, and the Boykin decision's procedural rule does not apply retroactively.
-
439 F.2d 307·
1st Cir.·
1971-03-04
·cited 18×
The court held that the district court properly disregarded the state court's findings regarding Miranda warnings and that the subsequent confessions were inadmissible due to incomplete warnings.
-
A state prisoner has no absolute federal constitutional right to bail pending appeal, and federal courts will not review state court discretion in granting or withholding bail if state remedies have not been exhausted.
-
The court held that a federal prisoner seeking credit for pre-sentence or post-sentence imprisonment must pursue relief in the sentencing court under 28 U.S.C. § 2255, not through a declaratory judgment action.
-
A state prisoner is entitled to a federal habeas corpus hearing if the state's fact-finding procedure was inadequate, and the federal court should grant a plenary hearing on claims of mental incompetency and plea involuntariness, potentially requiring appointment of counsel.
-
The court held that a federal court should not vacate a state court conviction for ineffective counsel without the prisoner first exhausting state remedies. However, a conviction obtained when the prosecuting attorney had a conflict of interest, representing the victim in a relat
-
138 Fla. 410·
Fla.·
1939-06-02
·cited 18×
J.D. Moon was arrested for violating Orlando's zoning ordinance by operating a tourist camp in a residential zone. The Florida Supreme Court held that the zoning ordinance was invalid and unenforceable because the required district map was never attached to the ordinance, making
-
The court granted the certificate of probable cause to appeal, finding the issue debatable among jurists of reason, but ultimately affirmed the district court's denial of the writ, holding the state court's 'paper hearing' was adequate for § 2254(d) presumption of correctness.
-
858 F.2d 1462·
10th Cir.·
1988-10-06
·cited 17×
The court held that the trial court's inquiry into the defendant's decision to waive counsel and proceed pro se was inadequate, violating his Sixth Amendment right to counsel.
-
The court held that the district court erred in applying a procedural bar to seventeen claims, which must be reconsidered on the merits, and affirmed the denial of other claims.
-
The court held that the petitioner was not guilty of deliberate delay that would support dismissal under Rule 9(a), and exhaustion of state remedies was achieved before final action by the district court.
-
Pre-trial federal habeas corpus relief is not available to adjudicate a state prisoner's speedy trial or due process claims when those issues can be resolved through pending state court proceedings.
-
The court held that the state's identification procedures did not violate due process, as the trial court's factual determination of reliability was entitled to a presumption of correctness under 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d).
-
666 F.2d 191·
5th Cir.·
1982-01-22
·cited 17×
Federal courts cannot grant habeas corpus relief for state court convictions based on alleged violations of federal statutory law if the state courts provided a full and fair opportunity to litigate those claims, unless the violation constitutes a fundamental defect resulting in
-
A pretrial application for a writ of prohibition to a state supreme court does not satisfy the exhaustion requirement for federal habeas corpus relief.
-
Failure to object to a coerced confession at trial, when done as a deliberate trial strategy to bypass state procedures, precludes a federal habeas corpus hearing on the confession's voluntariness, even if the trial occurred before Jackson v. Denno.
-
217 F.3d 1329·
11th Cir.·
2000-07-11
·cited 16×
David Cabberiza was indicted for first-degree murder and entitled to a twelve-person jury under Florida law, but his attorney agreed to a six-person jury without an on-the-record waiver. The Eleventh Circuit affirmed the district court's denial of habeas corpus relief, holding th
-
944 F.2d 1363·
7th Cir.·
1991-09-26
·cited 16×
The court concurs in the judgment, finding the standard for harmless constitutional error in collateral review is settled law in the circuit.
-
941 F.2d 253·
3d Cir.·
1991-08-16
·cited 16×
A state's violation of its own procedural speedy trial deadline does not automatically constitute a federal constitutional speedy trial violation, and counsel's agreement to a continuance, absent prejudice to the defense, does not amount to ineffective assistance of counsel.
-
A federal habeas corpus petitioner must demonstrate cause and prejudice for failing to raise claims in a prior petition, or show a fundamental miscarriage of justice, to avoid dismissal for abuse of the writ.
-
The dissent argues that the majority misapplies the 'plain statement' rule from Harris v. Reed, improperly expanding federal habeas review by disregarding an adequate and independent state procedural ground.
-
The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying High's motion for Rule 60(b)(6) relief because there was no supervening change in law and the jury's erroneous perception was not of constitutional dimension.
-
The court held that the Illinois appellate court's finding of waiver was an independent and adequate basis for decision, even though it also analyzed the issue for plain error.
-
The court held that the defendant's Sixth Amendment right to counsel was violated because he did not knowingly and intelligently waive his right to counsel and did not clearly assert his right to self-representation.
-
841 F.2d 677·
6th Cir.·
1988-03-07
·cited 16×
The court held that the appellant failed to establish a prima facie case for a Sixth Amendment fair-cross-section violation because young adults and college students are not distinctive groups, and the underrepresentation of women was not shown to be the result of systematic excl
-
The court held that the introduction of 'other crimes' evidence did not deny the petitioner a fair trial, and the petitioner failed to establish sufficient cause to excuse his procedural default in challenging jury composition.
-
The court held that the petitioner's claims were procedurally barred due to failure to object at trial, and even if considered, did not demonstrate ineffective assistance of counsel or prejudice.
-
777 F.2d 1239·
7th Cir.·
1985-11-26
·cited 16×
The court holds that the Wisconsin Supreme Court's finding of fact regarding the prosecutor's questioning is entitled to deference, and the jury instruction given is sufficiently different from that in Francis v. Franklin to warrant affirmance.
-
753 F.2d 1318·
5th Cir.·
1985-02-25
·cited 16×
The court held that a defendant's waiver of the right to counsel was knowing and intelligent, and that a claim for denial of compulsory process was procedurally defaulted and not preserved.
-
Explicit state court reliance on a procedural default bars federal habeas review of the forfeited claim absent a showing of cause and prejudice, regardless of whether the state court also ruled on the merits.
-
706 F.2d 568·
5th Cir.·
1983-06-06
·cited 16×
The court held that the petitioner's claims were procedurally defaulted under state law and thus unreviewable in federal habeas corpus proceedings without a showing of cause and prejudice.
-
The court held that jury instructions that allowed conviction for an offense not charged in the indictment violated the defendant's Sixth and Fourteenth Amendment right to notice of charges, warranting habeas corpus relief.
-
690 F.2d 1078·
4th Cir.·
1982-09-30
·cited 16×
The court held that the petitioner failed to establish a prima facie case of racial discrimination in the grand jury selection process due to insufficient statistical evidence and improper methodology.
-
The court affirmed the denial of habeas corpus relief, holding that the petitioner's procedural failures, including the provisional nature of the trial court's ruling and the failure to make an offer of proof, precluded a constitutional review of the exclusion of character witnes
-
686 F.2d 374·
6th Cir.·
1982-07-07
·cited 16×
The court held that the district court erred in granting summary judgment without an evidentiary hearing, as the fragmented record required further fact-finding on the speedy trial claim. The 11.5-month delay for a simple robbery was presumptively prejudicial.
-
680 F.2d 1173·
8th Cir.·
1982-06-04
·cited 16×
The court held that the petitioner demonstrated both cause for his procedural default and actual prejudice resulting from the jury selection method, satisfying the standard for collateral review.
-
The court held that a prisoner's pro se civil rights complaint alleging constitutional deprivations should not be dismissed unless it appears beyond doubt that no relief can be granted.
-
The court held that the state's procedural requirements for raising a federal constitutional claim were not satisfied in a way that would bar federal habeas review, and that the appellant's trial jury was sworn after the date of Taylor v. Louisiana, making the ruling applicable.
-
The court held that the Special Prosecutor did not breach the plea agreement by his conduct or recommendations, and therefore, the petitioner was not entitled to habeas corpus relief.
-
563 F.2d 168·
5th Cir.·
1977-11-17
·cited 16×
The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, sitting en banc, reversed the district court's grant of a writ of habeas corpus. The majority held that the petitioner's failure to comply with the Texas contemporaneous objection rule barred federal habeas review of his claim that the prosecut
-
The appellate court held that while the petitioner was not precluded from raising his constitutional claim due to failure to object, the prosecutor's remarks, viewed in context, did not deprive the defendant of a fair trial.
-
The court held that the district court erred in failing to consider all of the petitioner's habeas corpus claims, requiring remand for further proceedings on those claims. The court affirmed the denial of relief on the involuntary confession claim.
-
The court held that the petitioner's trial counsel's failure to object to jury instructions or call certain witnesses did not render the trial fundamentally unfair or constitute a miscarriage of justice, thus not violating constitutional rights.
-
The court held that the district court erred in dismissing the habeas corpus petition on non-exhaustion grounds when new evidence warranted an evidentiary hearing and the state had previously had a chance to address the issue.
-
The court held that the appellants lacked standing to bring a class action challenging the Florida Public Defender system due to a failure to establish a case or controversy.
-
The court held that petitioners waived their claims of systematic discrimination in jury selection by failing to raise them prior to their federal habeas corpus case, as required by Alabama procedural law and federal precedent.
-
The court held that allowing jurors who sat on the first trial to sit on the second trial, after the defendant had testified and invoked the Fifth Amendment, created a likelihood of prejudice that denied the petitioner due process.
-
The federal court improperly intervened in state proceedings by granting habeas corpus relief before state remedies were exhausted, thus the order granting relief is reversed.