Habeas Corpus

18,782 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• Warren v. McCALL
  709 F.2d 1183· 7th Cir.· 1983-06-10 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the prior judgment in a habeas corpus proceeding involving the same parties and issues has res judicata effect, barring the current civil rights appeal.
• Sutherland v. McCALL
  709 F.2d 730· D.C. Cir.· 1983-06-10 ·cited 12×
  The court held that a thirty-three month delay in a parole revocation hearing, while a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 4214(c), did not warrant habeas corpus relief because the petitioner failed to demonstrate prejudice.
• Daigre v. Maggio
  705 F.2d 786· 5th Cir.· 1983-05-27 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the district court erred in denying an evidentiary hearing on the petitioner's claims of ineffective assistance of counsel and right to counsel at lineup, but affirmed the denial of the claim regarding an impermissibly suggestive lineup.
• Collins v. A.L. Lockhart
  707 F.2d 341· 8th Cir.· 1983-05-11 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the petitioner's claims lacked merit and the district court's denial of the writ of habeas corpus should be affirmed.
• Yount v. Patton
  710 F.2d 956· 3d Cir.· 1983-05-10 ·cited 12×
  The court, in a concurring opinion, argues that the established constitutional standard for jury impartiality, allowing jurors with preconceived notions of guilt if they promise to be impartial, is flawed and should be replaced with a stricter standard.
• Johnson v. Mabry
  707 F.2d 323· 8th Cir.· 1983-05-06 ·cited 12×
  The court held that detrimental reliance is not necessary to enforce a plea bargain offer, adopting the reasoning of Cooper v. United States.
• Hawkins v. West
  706 F.2d 437· 2d Cir.· 1983-05-04 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the petitioner's claim of insufficient evidence was adequately presented to state courts and that the futility exception to the exhaustion requirement remains valid.
• Robinson v. J.W. Fairman
  704 F.2d 368· 7th Cir.· 1983-04-04 ·cited 12×
  A successive habeas corpus petition cannot be dismissed under Rule 9(b) for abuse of the writ based solely on the petitioner's response to a form question, especially when appointed counsel's ineffectiveness prevented the petitioner from adequately responding to the respondent's
• United States v. Bengston
  702 F.2d 656· 7th Cir.· 1983-03-18 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the indictment was constitutionally sufficient but remanded for an evidentiary hearing on whether the attorney's motion to withdraw due to a conflict of interest was dilatory.
• Scott v. Maggio
  695 F.2d 916· 5th Cir.· 1983-01-20 ·cited 12×
  The court affirmed the denial of habeas relief, holding that the petitioner's Fourth Amendment claims were either inapplicable or justified by exigent circumstances, the identification procedure was not impermissibly suggestive, hearsay was not admitted or did not deny fundamenta
• Joost v. U.S. Parole Comm'n
  698 F.2d 418· 10th Cir.· 1983-01-20 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the district court erred in dismissing the habeas corpus petition without issuing a show cause order, as the petitioner's allegations, if true, would entitle him to relief.
• Walker v. Zant
  693 F.2d 1087· 11th Cir.· 1982-12-16 ·cited 12×
  The court held that a federal court may grant habeas corpus relief if the petitioner has raised the same issues on direct appeal in state court, as this satisfies the exhaustion requirement.
• Hawk v. Solem
  693 F.2d 825· 8th Cir.· 1982-12-03 ·cited 12×
  A guilty plea is not subject to collateral attack based on a coerced confession unless counsel was ineffective, and there is no constitutional right to a jury determination of competency to stand trial or plead guilty.
• Carlton v. Keohane
  691 F.2d 992· 11th Cir.· 1982-11-15 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the district court correctly denied the federal prisoner's petition for a writ of habeas corpus because the Parole Commission's procedural errors were either cured or did not prejudice the petitioner.
• Gipson v. A.L. Lockhart & the Attorney Gen. of the State of Ark.
  692 F.2d 66· 8th Cir.· 1982-11-08 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the district court properly dismissed the habeas petition, affirming that counsel was not ineffective for failing to raise an entrapment defense inconsistent with the petitioner's trial testimony, and that sufficient evidence supported the conviction under fed
• Folston v. Allsbrook
  691 F.2d 184· 4th Cir.· 1982-09-27 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying a habeas corpus evidentiary hearing and in finding no constitutional error in the admission of evidence at the state trial.
• McCRAE v. Couie L. Wainwright
  422 So. 2d 824· Fla.· 1982-09-14 ·cited 12×
  James McCrae petitioned for habeas corpus and a stay of execution, challenging his death sentence for felony murder conviction. The Florida Supreme Court rejected all three grounds for relief, finding no fundamental error in jury instructions, no ineffective assistance of counsel
• Aiken v. Spalding
  684 F.2d 632· 9th Cir.· 1982-08-17 ·cited 12×
  Difficulty in reprosecution due to delay in filing a habeas petition is not sufficient prejudice to warrant dismissal under Rule 9(a).
• Shaw v. Smith
  680 F.2d 1104· 5th Cir.· 1982-07-23 ·cited 12×
  A federal prisoner is not entitled to credit on his federal sentence for time spent in state custody for an unrelated offense unless the state confinement was exclusively the product of federal action.
• Hunt v. State OF Okla.
  683 F.2d 1305· 10th Cir.· 1982-07-22 ·cited 12×
  The court held that while the state trial court's jury instructions on scienter were insufficient, the error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt because the evidence overwhelmingly demonstrated the defendant's knowledge of the film's contents, and her defense was not based on
• United States v. Wolff
  682 F.2d 691· 7th Cir.· 1982-07-14 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the district court erred in granting summary judgment on a habeas corpus petition alleging ineffective assistance of counsel, as factual issues regarding trial strategy and counsel's awareness of witnesses required a hearing.
• United States ex rel. Nathaniel Spurlark v. Wolff
  683 F.2d 216· 7th Cir.· 1982-07-14 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the petitioner's request for substitute counsel was dilatory and properly denied by the state trial court, and even if it were an error, it was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.
• Harman v. Mohn
  683 F.2d 834· 4th Cir.· 1982-07-07 ·cited 12×
  Plea bargains involving lenient treatment of a third party are not per se unconstitutional, provided the prosecutor acts in good faith and the court carefully scrutinizes the plea. A claim of ineffective assistance of counsel against a prior attorney is waived if not raised in th
• Rivera v. Coombe
  683 F.2d 697· 2d Cir.· 1982-06-29 ·cited 12×
  The dissenting judge argues that the majority opinion incorrectly upholds a jury instruction on intent that violates the Supreme Court's precedent in Sandstrom v. Montana.
• Ottway Barbee v. Ruth
  678 F.2d 634· 5th Cir.· 1982-06-18 ·cited 12×
  A guilty plea is valid even if the defendant is not informed that the sentence may run consecutively to a prior sentence.
• Deloney v. Estelle
  679 F.2d 372· 5th Cir.· 1982-06-14 ·cited 12×
• Cahill v. Rushen
  678 F.2d 791· 9th Cir.· 1982-06-02 ·cited 12×
  The dissenting judge would hold that the Massiah doctrine, rooted in the Sixth Amendment right to counsel, does not apply to post-sentencing confrontations between law enforcement and a convicted defendant.
• Danilo Zabala Artez v. Mulcrone
  673 F.2d 1169· 10th Cir.· 1982-04-01 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the Parole Commission's denial of parole did not violate the Ex Post Facto Clause or the Equal Protection Clause, nor did it unconstitutionally delegate judicial power.
• Kirksey v. Jones
  673 F.2d 58· 2d Cir.· 1982-03-08 ·cited 12×
  The court affirmed the denial of habeas corpus relief, finding that the appellant had not exhausted state remedies for two of his claims and that the one exhausted claim regarding the prosecutor's use of a co-defendant's confession did not violate the Confrontation Clause.
• Isidoro M. Arana v. United States Immigr. & Naturalization Serv.
  673 F.2d 75· 3d Cir.· 1982-03-08 ·cited 12×
  The court held that an individual subject to a deportation order who has absconded and failed to comply with court orders is disentitled from calling upon the court's resources to determine his claims.
• Kinson v. Carson
  409 So. 2d 1212· Fla. 1st DCA· 1982-02-19 ·cited 12×
  In this habeas corpus petition, petitioners challenged the denial of bail in an armed robbery case, arguing that affidavits alone were insufficient to establish that proof of guilt was evident or the presumption great. The court held that the state may satisfy its burden through
• Parisie v. Greer
  671 F.2d 1011· 7th Cir.· 1982-02-18 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the majority's disposition of the case without adequate exploration of premises and ramifications was improper.
• Staege v. United States Parole Comm'n
  671 F.2d 266· 8th Cir.· 1982-02-10 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the Parole Commission's reclassification of offense severity was a reasonable exercise of discretion and that the Notice of Action provided sufficient explanation. The court also found no error in the consideration of institutional adjustment or the calculatio
• United States ex rel. James W. Green v. Greer
  667 F.2d 585· 7th Cir.· 1981-12-10 ·cited 12×
  A federal district court is not required to examine the full trial record in a habeas corpus petition alleging insufficiency of evidence if the petitioner fails to identify any inaccuracies or incompleteness in the factual summaries already before the court.
• Cornell Fuller v. Anderson
  662 F.2d 420· 6th Cir.· 1981-09-18 ·cited 12×
  The dissenting judge would reverse the district court's grant of habeas corpus, arguing that federal courts are bound by state court factual findings and that the jury's verdict was rational.
• Weir v. Fletcher
  658 F.2d 1126· 6th Cir.· 1981-09-09 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the majority's interpretation of due process protection for post-arrest silence, absent Miranda warnings, is contrary to Supreme Court precedent.
• Moore v. Ballone
  658 F.2d 218· 4th Cir.· 1981-08-20 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the prolonged custodial interrogation of the defendant without timely Miranda warnings violated his constitutional rights, and any subsequent statements were tainted.
• Beebe v. Phelps
  650 F.2d 774· 5th Cir.· 1981-07-16 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the Louisiana statute requiring forfeiture of good time upon parole revocation, as applied to a crime committed before the statute's amendment, is an unconstitutional ex post facto law.
• Aubran Wayne Martin v. Warden, Huntingdon State Corr. Inst. & Attorney Gen. of the Commonwealth of Pa.
  653 F.2d 799· 3d Cir.· 1981-06-30 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the pretrial publicity did not create a presumption of prejudice, the voir dire was not unconstitutionally restrictive, and the felony-murder jury instructions did not violate due process.
• Clements v. Louie L. Wainwright
  648 F.2d 979· 5th Cir.· 1981-06-23 ·cited 12×
  The court held that an appeal from a denial of a state prisoner's habeas corpus petition cannot proceed without a certificate of probable cause, and the district court must rule on the motion for such a certificate.
• HU Yau-Leung v. Soscia
  649 F.2d 914· 2d Cir.· 1981-05-26 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the applicable extradition treaty's requirement that the offense constitute a felony under U.S. law is satisfied if the acts charged would be a felony under either federal or state law, regardless of the offender's age or potential for juvenile treatment.
• Wheeler v. United States
  640 F.2d 1116· 9th Cir.· 1981-04-03 ·cited 12×
  The court held that a post-sentencing order restricting a prisoner's mail privileges, issued ex parte without notice, is equivalent to a sentence for the purpose of collateral attack under 28 U.S.C. § 2255, and that the district court had jurisdiction to hear the petition to vaca
• Ashley v. Louie L. Wainwright
  639 F.2d 258· 5th Cir.· 1981-03-12 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the appellant failed to demonstrate a violation of his Sixth Amendment right to compulsory process because he did not show a colorable need for the informant's testimony.
• Anders Steinsvik v. Vinzant
  640 F.2d 949· 9th Cir.· 1981-02-23 ·cited 12×
  The court should have held an evidentiary hearing to determine Steinsvik's mental capacity at the time of his guilty plea due to evidence of a recent drug overdose and history of psychological problems.
• Bivens v. Wyrick
  640 F.2d 179· 8th Cir.· 1981-02-18 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the pretrial and in-court identification procedures, as well as the prosecutor's conduct, did not violate due process, and the district court did not err in denying an evidentiary hearing.
• Mondy v. Mondy
  395 So. 2d 193· Fla. 1st DCA· 1981-02-13 ·cited 12×
  Father appeals trial court's award of temporary custody to Mother in a child custody dispute where Father removed children from Alabama to Idaho and Mother subsequently removed them to Florida. The court affirms, holding that Florida has jurisdiction under the Uniform Child Custo
• Pate v. Smith
  637 F.2d 1068· 6th Cir.· 1981-01-09 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the trial judge's failure to conduct a competency hearing, despite evidence raising doubt about the petitioner's mental state, violated due process.
• Anthony v. Wilkinson
  637 F.2d 1130· 7th Cir.· 1980-12-23 ·cited 12×
• Bradley v. Emmett Fairfax
  634 F.2d 1126· 8th Cir.· 1980-11-26 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the disclosure of grand jury testimony to the Parole Commission was harmless error, and the presence of the prosecutor at the parole revocation hearing did not violate due process.
• Lomax v. State OF Ala.
  629 F.2d 413· 5th Cir.· 1980-10-27 ·cited 12×
  The Sixth Amendment right to counsel does not attach at the mere issuance of an arrest warrant; it attaches only upon the commencement of adversary judicial proceedings.