Habeas Corpus

18,784 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• Travis v. A.L. Lockhart
  787 F.2d 409· 8th Cir.· 1986-03-27 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the appellant's guilty plea was voluntary and knowing, and he did not receive ineffective assistance of counsel, thus affirming the dismissal of his habeas corpus petition.
• Cola v. Reardon
  787 F.2d 681· 1st Cir.· 1986-03-26 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the conviction was fundamentally unfair due to inadequate notice in the bill of particulars and jury instructions.
• Humphrey v. Boney
  785 F.2d 1495· 11th Cir.· 1986-03-25 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the jury instructions on implied malice and intent did not unconstitutionally shift the burden of proof or create a mandatory presumption, and the vagueness claim was procedurally barred.
• Shaw v. Johnson
  786 F.2d 993· 10th Cir.· 1986-03-17 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the jury instruction regarding presumed fear was harmless error, the sentencing error did not warrant habeas relief under Hicks, and Oklahoma's rule for proving prior convictions by documentary evidence alone does not violate due process.
• Davidson J. James v. Louie L. Wainwright
  484 So. 2d 1235· Fla.· 1986-03-14 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the prisoner's claims for a writ of habeas corpus and a stay of execution lacked merit and were therefore denied.
• Colley v. Sumner
  784 F.2d 984· 9th Cir.· 1986-03-12 ·cited 8×
  The dissenting judge concludes that the admission of Evelena Hohl's testimony was so unreliable and prejudicial as to deprive the defendant of a fair trial.
• Hoots v. Allsbrook
  785 F.2d 1214· 4th Cir.· 1986-03-05 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the majority misapplied the Strickland test by failing to consider the cumulative effect of counsel's errors, which created a reasonable probability of a different outcome.
• Maupin v. Smith
  785 F.2d 135· 6th Cir.· 1986-03-05 ·cited 8×
  The court held that a state court cannot enforce a procedural rule to preclude a defendant's constitutional right to due process when the procedural default resulted from a denial of the constitutional right to effective assistance of counsel.
• Clarissa Marsh v. Richardson
  781 F.2d 1201· 6th Cir.· 1986-01-23 ·cited 8×
  The Sixth Circuit held that the admission of a co-defendant's statement, even if redacted, violated the Confrontation Clause because it was powerfully incriminating and vital to the prosecution's case against the defendant, creating a substantial risk the jury considered it.
• Rastelli v. Warden, Metro. Corr. Ctr., N.Y., N.Y., United States Dep't of Just., Bureau of Prisons, & the United States Parole Comm'n
  782 F.2d 17· 2d Cir.· 1986-01-15 ·cited 8×
  The court held that 28 C.F.R. § 2.27(a), governing parole appeal processing times for original jurisdiction cases, does not conflict with the Parole Commission and Reorganization Act (PCRA). The court reversed the district court's decision invalidating the regulation.
• United States ex rel. Dudley James Russo v. Attorney General OF Illinois
  780 F.2d 712· 7th Cir.· 1986-01-07 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the trial judge's ratification of the plea agreement, coupled with the failure to inform the defendant of the mandatory parole term, violated due process, but the remedy is to expunge the parole term, not allow a new plea.
• Minor Michael Still v. United States Marshal
  780 F.2d 848· 10th Cir.· 1985-12-23 ·cited 8×
  The dissenting judge would hold that the Parole Commission has the authority to withdraw an executed parole violator warrant, similar to its authority to delay execution, and that the federal sentence should not recommence.
• Gibson v. Klevenhagen
  777 F.2d 1056· 5th Cir.· 1985-12-10 ·cited 8×
  The court held that a guilty plea does not waive a speedy trial claim if state law permits appeal of pre-trial motions after a plea. The district court erred in dismissing the habeas petition.
• Marler v. Blackburn
  777 F.2d 1007· 5th Cir.· 1985-12-04 ·cited 8×
  The court affirmed the district court's dismissal of the habeas corpus petition, finding no ineffective assistance of counsel, insufficient evidence, or due process violation.
• Esquivel v. O.L. McCOTTER
  777 F.2d 956· 5th Cir.· 1985-11-19 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the trial judge's restriction of voir dire did not render the trial constitutionally infirm, and the Texas death penalty scheme provides adequate guidance.
• Sanderson v. Rice
  777 F.2d 902· 4th Cir.· 1985-11-15 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the North Carolina statute N.C.Gen.Stat. § 90-95(h) was intended by the legislature to create two separate offenses for trafficking by possession and trafficking by manufacture, thus not violating double jeopardy principles. However, it reversed and remanded f
• United States ex rel. William J. Miller v. Kenneth McGINNIS & Attorney Gen. of the State of Ill.
  774 F.2d 819· 7th Cir.· 1985-10-04 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the trial court's failure to inform the defendant of the mandatory supervised release term violated his due process rights, but also found that the totality of errors, including failure to inform of other rights and the defendant's age and confusion, rendered
• Hernando Paez v. O'Lone
  772 F.2d 1158· 3d Cir.· 1985-09-23 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the evidence presented at trial was constitutionally sufficient to prove possession beyond a reasonable doubt, and the trial court's jury instructions did not violate due process.
• Will Anderson and Kinston Kirk v. Miller
  772 F.2d 375· 7th Cir.· 1985-09-11 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court correctly granted summary judgment because the federal prisoners failed to exhaust their administrative remedies by deliberately bypassing the Bureau of Prisons' established procedures.
• United States v. DeROBERTIS
  771 F.2d 1057· 7th Cir.· 1985-08-27 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the trial court's failure to investigate a timely objection to joint representation based on conflicting defenses violated the Sixth Amendment, and that an actual conflict of interest adversely affected counsel's representation, warranting habeas corpus relief
• Elmore v. Foltz
  768 F.2d 773· 6th Cir.· 1985-07-26 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the destruction of potentially exculpatory tapes did not violate due process under the Trombetta standard because there was no bad faith, the tapes were unlikely to be exculpatory, and comparable impeachment evidence was available.
• Payret v. Honorable Don T. Adams
  471 So. 2d 218· Fla. 4th DCA· 1985-06-26 ·cited 8×
  A pretrial detainee sought habeas corpus relief based on a local administrative order provision requiring personal recognizance release if formal charges were not filed within 21 days. The court held that this administrative provision conflicted with Florida Criminal Procedure Ru
• McAFFEE v. Procunier
  761 F.2d 1124· 5th Cir.· 1985-06-03 ·cited 8×
  The court affirmed the denial of habeas corpus regarding evidentiary rulings but remanded for an evidentiary hearing on the sentencing issue, finding a potential due process violation.
• Smith v. Procunier
  769 F.2d 170· 4th Cir.· 1985-05-10 ·cited 8×
  The court affirmed the denial of habeas corpus relief, finding no constitutional error in the sentencing phase of the trial.
• Cantone v. Superintendent, NEW York Corr. Facility AT Green Haven, & Robert Abrams, Attorney Gen. of the State of N.Y.
  759 F.2d 207· 2d Cir.· 1985-03-26 ·cited 8×
  The court held that while the petitioner made a specific request for the withheld information, the information was not material under Brady v. Maryland, and thus did not deprive him of due process. The court also found the mistrial claim was procedurally defaulted.
• Breest v. Cunningham
  752 F.2d 8· 1st Cir.· 1985-01-11 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the state court's imposition of a special sentence under the psycho-sexual murder statute was unconstitutional because the court departed from the notice provided in the bill of particulars.
• Monroe v. Blackburn
  748 F.2d 958· 5th Cir.· 1984-12-04 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court did not err in ordering the state to reconsider the new trial motion rather than granting a new trial outright, and affirmed the denial of other claims.
• Speedy v. Wyrick
  748 F.2d 481· 8th Cir.· 1984-11-15 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the evidence before the trial court was insufficient to raise a reasonable doubt as to the defendant's competency to stand trial, thus the trial court was not required to sua sponte order a competency hearing.
• State v. Scoratow
  456 So. 2d 922· Fla. 3d DCA· 1984-09-04 ·cited 8×
  Florida appealed a habeas corpus decision discharging Jay Scoratow from extradition to North Carolina. The appellate court reversed, holding that when an executive warrant is regular on its face and there is merely contradictory evidence about the accused's presence in the demand
• Irby v. State
  454 So. 2d 757· Fla. 1st DCA· 1984-08-23 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the trial court properly denied the motion for postconviction relief because the grounds raised were either raised or could have been raised on direct appeal, and the motion lacked sufficient factual allegations.
• Emilio Aparaca Flores v. The Honorable Patricia W. Cocalis
  453 So. 2d 1198· Fla. 4th DCA· 1984-08-15 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in setting the petitioner's bail at $125,000, as the determination was reasonable based on the evidence presented.
• Bibby v. Tard
  741 F.2d 26· 3d Cir.· 1984-08-03 ·cited 8×
  The court held that a federal district court must conduct an evidentiary hearing on a habeas corpus petition if the petitioner alleges the sentencing judge relied on materially false information regarding prior convictions, and the state courts did not provide a full and fair hea
• Gulliver v. Dalsheim
  739 F.2d 104· 2d Cir.· 1984-07-18 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the appellate counsel's brief, while perhaps not perfect, met the constitutional standard for effective assistance, and reversed the grant of habeas corpus.
• Tsirizotakis v. LeFEVRE
  736 F.2d 57· 2d Cir.· 1984-06-11 ·cited 8×
  The court affirmed the denial of the habeas petition, finding that the petitioner procedurally defaulted on his claims and that his counsel's assistance did not constitute cause for the default or an independent constitutional violation.
• Rowe v. A.L. Lockhart
  736 F.2d 457· 8th Cir.· 1984-06-06 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court correctly denied the habeas corpus petition because the lineup identification was not unconstitutional and the rule of lenity did not apply to the sentencing issue.
• Morgan v. Israel
  735 F.2d 1033· 7th Cir.· 1984-05-31 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the defendant knowingly waived his right to a trial on the issue of intent by pleading not guilty by reason of insanity, and thus his petition for habeas corpus was properly denied.
• Prado McGEE, Jr. v. W.J. Estelle, Jr.
  732 F.2d 447· 5th Cir.· 1984-05-21 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the use of a constitutionally invalid prior conviction for sentence enhancement, when that conviction was specifically alleged in the indictment, cannot be considered harmless error, even if other valid convictions exist. The court also found that the district
• Trass v. Maggio
  731 F.2d 288· 5th Cir.· 1984-05-07 ·cited 8×
  The court held that counsel's failure to move for severance, stemming from ignorance of the law, constituted ineffective assistance of counsel, entitling the petitioner to a new trial.
• United States ex rel. John Clauser v. McCEVERS
  731 F.2d 423· 7th Cir.· 1984-04-06 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the trial court's termination of the first trial due to a defective indictment based on false testimony was occasioned by manifest necessity, and therefore, the subsequent reindictment and conviction did not violate the Double Jeopardy Clause.
• Dougan v. Louie L. Wainwright
  448 So. 2d 1005· Fla.· 1984-04-05 ·cited 8×
  Jacob John Dougan petitioned for habeas corpus relief from his death sentence conviction, claiming his appellate counsel provided ineffective assistance due to conflict of interest and failure to raise meritorious claims. The Florida Supreme Court granted the petition and ordered
• Tyler v. Wyrick
  730 F.2d 1209· 8th Cir.· 1984-04-02 ·cited 8×
  The court held that a state prisoner's federal habeas petition must be dismissed if it contains any unexhausted claims, even if other claims have been exhausted.
• Britton v. State
  447 So. 2d 458· Fla. 2d DCA· 1984-03-30 ·cited 8×
  Terrance Britton appealed the denial of his habeas corpus petition challenging defective extradition papers from New York to Florida. The Florida District Court of Appeal held that the extradition documents failed to comply with statutory requirements because they included only a
• Weber v. Israel
  730 F.2d 499· 7th Cir.· 1984-03-22 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the petitioner's failure to raise the insanity plea issue in state court due to procedural default barred federal habeas review, and alternatively, that the withdrawal of the insanity plea was not clearly erroneous and was a valid strategic decision.
• Funchess v. State
  449 So. 2d 1283· Fla.· 1984-03-08 ·cited 8×
  A death penalty appeal where Funchess challenged his capital murder conviction and death sentences imposed for two murders in 1975. The court addressed claims of ineffective assistance at trial and on appeal, as well as alleged jury instruction errors and doubling of aggravating
• Dufresne v. Moran
  729 F.2d 18· 1st Cir.· 1984-03-01 ·cited 8×
  A guilty plea is not invalidated by counsel's incompetence unless the incompetence actually and materially influenced the defendant's decision to plead guilty.
• Cole v. Hunter
  726 F.2d 434· 8th Cir.· 1984-02-07 ·cited 8×
  The court affirmed the denial of the habeas corpus petition, finding no violation of the Sixth Amendment right to confrontation and declining to reach the merits of the Fifth Amendment claim due to failure to exhaust state remedies.
• Carrillo v. Perkins
  723 F.2d 1165· 5th Cir.· 1984-01-30 ·cited 8×
  A restriction on cross-examination of a prosecution witness regarding potential bias, even if it violates the Sixth Amendment's confrontation clause, can be harmless error if other evidence of guilt is overwhelming.
• Rubin J. Mauldin v. Louie L. Wainwright
  723 F.2d 799· 11th Cir.· 1984-01-23 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court correctly granted the writ of habeas corpus because the petitioner received ineffective assistance of counsel.
• Castaldo v. United States Parole Comm'n & George Rodgers
  725 F.2d 94· 10th Cir.· 1984-01-16 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the Parole Commission adequately established good cause to exceed parole guidelines based on the magnitude of the offense and prior cocaine convictions, and that no impermissible double-counting occurred.
• Guice v. Fortenberry
  722 F.2d 276· 5th Cir.· 1984-01-09 ·cited 8×
  The state's rebuttal evidence was sufficient to support the trial court's finding that the grand jury foreman was not selected on racial grounds.