Habeas Corpus

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

• Raulerson v. United States
  901 F.2d 1009· 11th Cir.· 1990-05-21 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the government did not breach the plea agreement by opposing a sentence reduction or by failing to ensure personal appearance at all proceedings, but affirmed the district court's finding that the government breached the agreement regarding the return of the F
• State v. Carlton Ajim
  565 So. 2d 712· Fla. 4th DCA· 1990-05-16 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the trial court misconstrued a prior order by precluding the application of State v. Arthur, which allows denial of bail when proof is evident and presumption is great for certain offenses.
• Alba Nubia Correa v. Thornburgh
  901 F.2d 1166· 2d Cir.· 1990-04-20 ·cited 10×
  A resident alien attempting to re-enter the United States is subject to exclusion laws, and was not 'admitted' if she remained under official restraint, even if she had passed initial inspection.
• Quezada v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv.
  898 F.2d 474· 5th Cir.· 1990-04-18 ·cited 10×
  An alien's departure from the United States after a deportation order moots any appeal of that order, divesting courts of statutory jurisdiction to review it.
• Sanders v. Sullivan
  900 F.2d 601· 2d Cir.· 1990-04-16 ·cited 10×
  The court held that while a manslaughter conviction based on recanted testimony should be overturned, convictions for robbery and weapon possession should stand due to independent corroborating evidence and the limited scope of the recantation.
• Blalock v. A.L. Lockhart
  898 F.2d 1367· 8th Cir.· 1990-03-27 ·cited 10×
  The court held that a federal evidentiary hearing is required to determine if the petitioner received ineffective assistance of counsel regarding the accomplice corroboration rule and whether his guilty plea was knowing and voluntary.
• Lafonda Fay Foster v. Kassulke
  898 F.2d 1144· 6th Cir.· 1990-03-22 ·cited 10×
  Federal courts must abstain from intervening in pending state criminal proceedings, even on appeal, unless extraordinary circumstances exist.
• Spaziano v. Dugger
  557 So. 2d 1372· Fla.· 1990-03-15 ·cited 10×
  Joseph Robert Spaziano sought a writ of habeas corpus and appealed the denial of his third motion for post-conviction relief under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850 in a death penalty case. The Florida Supreme Court, reviewing the case for the fifth time, affirmed the tria
• Kelly v. Neubert
  898 F.2d 15· 3d Cir.· 1990-03-14 ·cited 10×
  A restructuring of a sentence does not trigger the Pearce rule when the aggregate sentence is less than originally imposed and there is no evidence of vindictiveness by the sentencing court.
• Frank C. Peterson (80-A-1720) v. Scully
  896 F.2d 661· 2d Cir.· 1990-02-07 ·cited 10×
  The court held that a new Supreme Court rule requires federal courts to consider the merits of a habeas petition if the state appellate court's opinion does not clearly and expressly state that its judgment rests on a state procedural bar.
• Leecan v. Lopes
  893 F.2d 1434· 2d Cir.· 1990-01-11 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the prosecutor's cross-examination of Leecan about his post-arrest silence did not violate Doyle v. Ohio because Leecan invited the inquiry by implying he had offered his alibi to police upon surrender, and any Doyle violation on recross-examination was harmle
• Grancorvitz v. Franklin
  890 F.2d 34· 7th Cir.· 1989-11-27 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the trial court's determination of jury impartiality was not manifestly erroneous and that the prosecutor's comments on the defendant's post-arrest silence were permissible.
• Leeroy B. Bostic, Jr. v. Carlson
  884 F.2d 1267· 9th Cir.· 1989-09-07 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court's dismissals of the habeas corpus petitions were proper because the appellant failed to demonstrate a denial of due process or present sufficient facts to support his claims.
• Jedonna Young v. Tekla Miller
  883 F.2d 1276· 6th Cir.· 1989-08-29 ·cited 10×
  The court affirmed the denial of the habeas corpus petition, finding no merit in the claims of ineffective assistance of counsel, improper denial of severance, or cruel and unusual punishment.
• Spain v. Rushen
  883 F.2d 712· 9th Cir.· 1989-08-22 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the trial judge's decision to shackle the defendant was not an abuse of discretion that denied due process, considering the specific security risks and the defendant's history.
• Lesko v. Owens
  881 F.2d 44· 3d Cir.· 1989-07-27 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the admission of gruesome details of a prior murder was unduly prejudicial and violated the defendant's right to a fair trial. Additionally, the court found that a potential plea agreement violation raised serious due process concerns.
• Jones v. Berry
  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
• Taylor v. Armontrout
  877 F.2d 726· 8th Cir.· 1989-06-20 ·cited 10×
  A federal court lacks habeas corpus jurisdiction over a conviction whose sentence has completely expired, even if that conviction is used to enhance a subsequent sentence.
• D.B. v. State
  544 So. 2d 1108· Fla. 1st DCA· 1989-06-13 ·cited 10×
  This case reviews the criteria for detaining a juvenile charged with a felony drug offense. The court held that the juvenile's prior non-judicial and successfully terminated judicial interventions for less serious offenses did not meet the statutory criteria for continued detenti
• Sampson Ellis v. A.L. Lockhart
  875 F.2d 200· 8th Cir.· 1989-05-24 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the petitioner's claim of ineffective assistance of counsel is procedurally barred due to failure to exhaust state remedies within the prescribed time limits.
• Kirkpatrick v. Butler
  870 F.2d 276· 5th Cir.· 1989-04-17 ·cited 10×
  The court held that Kirkpatrick was not denied effective assistance of counsel because, although his attorney's failure to challenge the evidence seized from his apartment was deficient, Kirkpatrick failed to demonstrate that the outcome of the proceeding would have been differen
• Burden v. Zant
  871 F.2d 956· 11th Cir.· 1989-04-10 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the record was inadequate to resolve the conflict of interest claim and remanded for an evidentiary hearing.
• Robtoy v. Kincheloe
  871 F.2d 1478· 9th Cir.· 1989-03-31 ·cited 10×
  The court held that a sentence of life without parole is unconstitutional under United States v. Jackson if it is imposed only on defendants who choose to go to trial rather than plead guilty. The court also held that the denial of a motion to change a plea and the admissibility
• Rushing v. Butler
  868 F.2d 800· 5th Cir.· 1989-03-30 ·cited 10×
  The introduction of victim impact evidence during the sentencing phase of a capital trial violates the Eighth Amendment by creating an impermissible risk that the death penalty will be imposed arbitrarily.
• United States ex rel. Bernard Wandick v. James A. Chrans & Neil Hartigan
  869 F.2d 1084· 7th Cir.· 1989-03-15 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the petitioner voluntarily and intelligently waived his right to a jury trial and that sufficient evidence supported his conviction.
• Davis v. Maynard
  869 F.2d 1401· 10th Cir.· 1989-03-14 ·cited 10×
  The court affirmed the conviction but vacated the death sentence, finding that the jury instructions in the guilt phase did not unconstitutionally shift the burden of proof and that the exclusion of certain venire members was not reversible error. However, the court found the dea
• Rahming v. T.H. Bigham
  539 So. 2d 10· Fla. 1st DCA· 1989-02-28 ·cited 10×
  Rahming, an inmate in administrative confinement for over a year, appealed the summary dismissal of his habeas corpus petition alleging lack of due process hearings. The court reversed, holding that summary dismissal was improper where the inmate made specific allegations that, i
• Nichols v. Sullivan
  867 F.2d 1250· 10th Cir.· 1989-02-06 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the petitioner's due process rights were not violated by witness testimony regarding prior incarceration or by the sentencing judge's alleged bias, and thus affirmed the dismissal of his habeas corpus petition.
• Hursey Davis v. Warden, Joliet Corr. Inst. AT Stateville
  867 F.2d 1003· 7th Cir.· 1989-02-01 ·cited 10×
  The dissent argues that the Appellee made a prima facie case for a Sixth Amendment violation based on systematic exclusion of Black individuals from the jury venire, and the state failed to rebut this case.
• Richardson v. Johnson
  864 F.2d 1536· 11th Cir.· 1989-01-17 ·cited 10×
  The court affirmed the denial of the habeas corpus petition, finding that Richardson's claims were either procedurally defaulted, lacked merit under applicable legal standards, or were barred by his own contradictory trial testimony.
• Bond v. Fulcomer
  864 F.2d 306· 3d Cir.· 1989-01-03 ·cited 10×
  The court held that an untimely petition for review filed with the highest state court can satisfy the exhaustion requirement for federal habeas corpus relief, and that a procedural default may be excused by ineffective assistance of counsel, which must first be presented to stat
• Sulie v. Duckworth
  864 F.2d 1348· 7th Cir.· 1988-12-22 ·cited 10×
  The court held that while the district court erred in applying Kuhlmann's strict factual innocence requirement, the alleged constitutional error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.
• Levesque v. Edward Brennan & the United States Parole Comm'n
  864 F.2d 515· 7th Cir.· 1988-12-19 ·cited 10×
  The Parole Commission is not bound by a sentencing court's decision to disregard controverted information in a presentence report for sentencing purposes, and may make its own determination of facts for parole decisions.
• Palmer v. Grammer
  863 F.2d 588· 8th Cir.· 1988-12-15 ·cited 10×
  The Double Jeopardy Clause does not preclude retrial when a conviction is reversed due to the erroneous admission of evidence, even if the remaining evidence is insufficient, as the reviewing court must consider all evidence admitted at trial.
• Smith v. Armontrout
  865 F.2d 1502· 8th Cir.· 1988-12-08 ·cited 10×
  The dissenting judges believe that Gerald Smith's personal history supports the need for a current evidentiary hearing to determine his competency to dismiss his appeal.
• Landano v. Rafferty
  859 F.2d 301· 3d Cir.· 1988-10-17 ·cited 10×
  Orders denying retroactive appointment of counsel and waiver of maximum fees under the Criminal Justice Act are not final decisions appealable under 28 U.S.C. § 1291.
• Otey v. Grammer
  859 F.2d 575· 8th Cir.· 1988-10-13 ·cited 10×
  The court affirmed the denial of the habeas corpus petition, finding no merit to the claims of ineffective assistance of counsel or other constitutional violations.
• Blue v. Lacy
  857 F.2d 479· 8th Cir.· 1988-09-20 ·cited 10×
  The Parole Commission may consider disputed allegations of criminal activity in a PSI, even if the sentencing court disregarded them, if the Commission finds the information sufficiently accurate for its purposes.
• Simmons v. A.L. Lockhart
  856 F.2d 1144· 8th Cir.· 1988-09-14 ·cited 10×
  The court granted the motion to recall its mandate and petition for rehearing, remanding the case to the District Court for further proceedings on specific constitutional claims.
• White v. United States Parole Comm'n & John Sullivan
  856 F.2d 59· 8th Cir.· 1988-09-06 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the Parole Commission did not waive its right to use prior charges by delaying revocation proceedings and that the parolee received adequate notice of the charges considered at the second hearing.
• Smith v. Zant
  855 F.2d 712· 11th Cir.· 1988-08-26 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the defendant did not intelligently waive his Miranda rights due to his mental limitations and the circumstances of the interrogation, and that the admission of his confession was not harmless error as to his conviction for malice murder and armed robbery.
• Gregorio F. Vargas v. Swan
  854 F.2d 1028· 7th Cir.· 1988-08-12 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the record was insufficient to determine if the INS's detainer or parole status constituted sufficient custody for federal habeas jurisdiction, and remanded for further factual development.
• Walton v. Lane
  852 F.2d 268· 7th Cir.· 1988-07-15 ·cited 10×
  The court held that despite a potentially suggestive pre-trial identification procedure, the victim's identification was sufficiently reliable under the totality of the circumstances to satisfy due process, and thus the habeas corpus writ should not have been granted.
• Zackary Rogers v. Lynaugh
  848 F.2d 606· 5th Cir.· 1988-06-30 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the prosecutor's argument to the jury, suggesting they allocate ten years for each prior conviction in addition to the current offense, constituted constitutional error under the Double Jeopardy Clause, and this error was not harmless beyond a reasonable doubt
• Pratt v. D.J. McCARTHY
  850 F.2d 590· 9th Cir.· 1988-06-29 ·cited 10×
  The court held that a misunderstanding among counsel regarding who would file a notice of appeal does not constitute excusable neglect under Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 4(a)(5).
• Stewart v. Corbin
  850 F.2d 492· 9th Cir.· 1988-06-16 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the trial court's decision to shackle and gag the appellant during his trial, while potentially prejudicial, was a constitutionally permissible response to his extreme escape risk, violent behavior, and repeated defiance of court orders, and thus did not viola
• Lane T. Mele v. Fitchburg Dist. Court
  850 F.2d 817· 1st Cir.· 1988-06-15 ·cited 10×
  An issue is not considered fairly presented to the state's highest court for exhaustion purposes unless the applicant has raised it within the application for further appellate review.
• Byrne v. Roemer
  847 F.2d 1130· 5th Cir.· 1988-06-13 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the prisoner was not entitled to a stay of execution because his section 1983 claim, based on the premise that a Louisiana statute unconstitutionally limited his federal right to seek Supreme Court review, lacked merit. The federal statute does not grant the a
• Gauntlett v. Kelley
  849 F.2d 213· 6th Cir.· 1988-06-08 ·cited 10×
  The court held that a harsher sentence imposed after a defendant successfully appeals their original sentence does not violate due process or double jeopardy if there is no presumption of vindictiveness and the defendant had no reasonable expectation of finality in the original s
• Meeks v. Cabana
  845 F.2d 1319· 5th Cir.· 1988-05-31 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the appellant waived his right to appeal his conviction and sentence, and thus, the dismissal of his habeas corpus petition was affirmed.