Habeas Corpus

18,785 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• Bland v. State OF Ala.
  356 F.2d 8· 5th Cir.· 1965-12-27 ·cited 8×
• Otto Thompson v. COX
  352 F.2d 488· 10th Cir.· 1965-11-15 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the appellant's confession was voluntary as a matter of law and fact, despite unorthodox interrogation procedures, and thus his habeas corpus petition was properly denied.
• Sperling v. Willingham
  353 F.2d 6· 7th Cir.· 1965-11-03 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the sentences imposed were definite and clearly defined, and the statute under which one sentence was imposed is constitutional.
• Commonwealth OF Pa. ex rel. George W. Craig v. Maroney
  352 F.2d 30· 3d Cir.· 1965-11-02 ·cited 8×
  The court denied the petition for rehearing solely because the petitioner failed to exhaust available state court remedies.
• Gantar v. COX
  351 F.2d 65· 10th Cir.· 1965-09-21 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the appellant suffered no prejudice from the lack of counsel at his initial appearance before the Justice of the Peace, and his subsequent guilty plea waived any prior procedural defects.
• Berryhill v. Page
  349 F.2d 984· 10th Cir.· 1965-08-26 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the petitioner was denied his constitutional right to counsel when he pleaded guilty to murder without understandingly waiving that right.
• Roberts v. Crouse
  350 F.2d 299· 10th Cir.· 1965-08-23 ·cited 8×
  The court held that even if one sentence was void, the petitioner would not be entitled to release because other valid sentences remained unserved and unchallenged.
• Lipscomb v. Stevens
  349 F.2d 997· 6th Cir.· 1965-08-04 ·cited 8×
  The transfer of a federal prisoner to a state prison for concurrent service of state and federal sentences, under an agreement for the federal government to reclaim the prisoner, does not divest the federal government of jurisdiction.
• McCLOSKEY v. Boslow
  349 F.2d 119· 4th Cir.· 1965-07-29 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court erred in denying a habeas corpus petition without an evidentiary hearing, as the state court's factual findings may not have been adequately supported by the record.
• Henderson v. Heinze
  349 F.2d 67· 9th Cir.· 1965-07-14 ·cited 8×
  The court held that a petitioner claiming a Fourth Amendment violation in a federal habeas proceeding waives the attorney-client privilege regarding communications about the deliberate by-passing of state remedies.
• Brown v. COX
  347 F.2d 936· 10th Cir.· 1965-06-21 ·cited 8×
  A knowing, intelligent, and voluntary guilty plea, entered with advice of counsel, waives alleged defects preceding the plea.
• Ronzzo v. Sigler
  346 F.2d 565· 8th Cir.· 1965-06-14 ·cited 8×
  Denial of counsel at a preliminary hearing does not violate due process if the defendant is not required to plead or take actions that could affirmatively prejudice their rights.
• Joe v. Lovato
  344 F.2d 916· 10th Cir.· 1965-05-03 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the appellant competently and intelligently waived his right to counsel at arraignment and sentencing, and no prejudice arose from prior proceedings.
• Morgan Kirby Watkins v. Crouse
  344 F.2d 927· 10th Cir.· 1965-04-22 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the appellant deliberately bypassed available state court remedies by refusing to pursue his granted right to appeal, thus forfeiting those remedies.
• Stirone v. Markley
  345 F.2d 473· 7th Cir.· 1965-04-08 ·cited 8×
  The court held that a district court lacks jurisdiction to entertain a habeas corpus petition if the petitioner has already pursued and been denied relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2255, unless the § 2255 remedy is shown to be inadequate or ineffective.
• United States ex rel. William A. Wynn v. Wilkins
  342 F.2d 777· 2d Cir.· 1965-03-16 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the petitioner's application for a writ of habeas corpus was premature because he had not exhausted his available state remedies.
• Harper v. State
  172 So. 2d 454· Fla.· 1965-02-24 ·cited 8×
• Harris v. Thomas
  341 F.2d 560· 6th Cir.· 1965-02-23 ·cited 8×
  The court held that a city attorney is not per se disqualified to represent a defendant in circuit court, and the petitioner failed to allege facts showing ineffective assistance of counsel.
• Newsom v. Peyton
  341 F.2d 904· 4th Cir.· 1965-02-19 ·cited 8×
  The court held that denial of certiorari is not a decision on the merits and that the petitioner sufficiently indicated his desire to appeal and his indigency.
• Achillies G. Cyronne-DeVIRGIN v. State OF Mo. & Dr. Donald B. Peterson
  341 F.2d 568· 8th Cir.· 1965-02-15 ·cited 8×
  The court held that a federal habeas corpus petition should be denied for failure to exhaust state remedies when a newly enacted state statute provides a mechanism for judicial review of the petitioner's current mental condition and potential release.
• Barkan v. The United States
  341 F.2d 95· 10th Cir.· 1965-01-27 ·cited 8×
  Habeas corpus is not an alternative remedy to a motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 unless the latter is shown to be inadequate or ineffective.
• Headley v. Selkowitz
  171 So. 2d 368· Fla.· 1965-01-20 ·cited 8×
  A city ordinance making it disorderly conduct to be unable to give a satisfactory account of oneself or to lack lawful means of support is unconstitutionally vague on its face.
• Gravette v. Maxwell
  340 F.2d 95· 6th Cir.· 1965-01-14 ·cited 8×
  The court held that a federal court properly dismissed a habeas corpus petition when the petitioner had not exhausted available state remedies.
• United States ex rel. Alvin Clark v. Maroney
  339 F.2d 710· 3d Cir.· 1964-12-30 ·cited 8×
  The admission of illegally seized evidence at trial violated the appellant's constitutional rights, invalidating his conviction, and the exclusionary rule of Mapp v. Ohio applies retroactively to cases not yet final.
• State of Fla. ex rel. John Thomas Callahan, Jr. v. Michell
  170 So. 2d 290· Fla.· 1964-12-21 ·cited 8×
  The Florida Supreme Court denied a petition for certiorari challenging a District Court of Appeal decision in a habeas corpus case, holding that Section 79.11, F.S.A. (an 1879 statute requiring judicial consent for appeals) is obsolete and has been entirely superseded by the 1956
• United States ex rel. Thomas Goins v. Walker
  340 F.2d 6· 5th Cir.· 1964-12-16 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court's finding that a witness's recantation was not credible was not clearly erroneous and affirmed the denial of the writ of habeas corpus.
• Byers v. Crouse
  339 F.2d 550· 10th Cir.· 1964-12-11 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the Kansas Habitual Criminal Act is constitutional and that the appellant's conviction and sentence were valid, despite minor procedural irregularities.
• Hubbard v. Tinsley
  336 F.2d 854· 10th Cir.· 1964-10-05 ·cited 8×
  The federal court held that the state court did not provide a full and fair hearing on the issue of consent to the search, as required by federal constitutional standards.
• United States ex rel. William Witherspoon v. Ogilvie
  337 F.2d 427· 7th Cir.· 1964-09-28 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the Illinois statute requiring the jury to fix punishment for murder did not violate due process or equal protection, and that the trial judge's remark about cumulative evidence was not prejudicial error.
• Benson v. People OF the State OF Cal.
  336 F.2d 791· 9th Cir.· 1964-09-24 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the use of recordings obtained through consensual entry, even if based on artifice, did not violate the appellant's Fourth or Fifth Amendment rights, and thus habeas corpus relief was properly denied.
• Harris v. Maxwell
  337 F.2d 710· 6th Cir.· 1964-09-18 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court correctly dismissed the habeas corpus petition for failure to exhaust state remedies, as appellant had not presented his federal claims to the Ohio Supreme Court.
• United States ex rel. Theodore R. Krzywosz v. Wilkins
  336 F.2d 509· 2d Cir.· 1964-09-14 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the prisoner's habeas corpus petition was properly denied because his allegations did not present a federal constitutional claim and he had not exhausted available state remedies for some claims.
• Haier v. United States
  334 F.2d 441· 10th Cir.· 1964-07-24 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the trial court erred in applying requirements of diligence and a showing of a different retrial result to a motion to vacate sentence under 28 U.S.C. § 2255.
• DeGRANDIS v. FAY
  335 F.2d 173· 2d Cir.· 1964-07-02 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the mere fact of jury fatigue during deliberations does not automatically vitiate a verdict if the agreement was deliberate and voluntary.
• Brown v. Pepersack
  334 F.2d 9· 4th Cir.· 1964-06-23 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the petitioner did not receive inadequate representation of counsel regarding the removal of his case, and that his third trial was fair.
• Warren v. Richardson
  333 F.2d 781· 9th Cir.· 1964-06-16 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the defendant's absence from a hearing where his sentence was affirmed, under 18 U.S.C. § 4208(b), constituted an error requiring remand for a proper hearing, but not grounds to vacate the conviction.
• United States ex rel. Carl Melton v. Hendrick
  330 F.2d 263· 3d Cir.· 1964-04-03 ·cited 8×
  The court held that a death sentence imposed on a "mental defective" convicted of first-degree murder, after full consideration of his mental condition, does not violate the Fourteenth Amendment's prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment, nor does the Commonwealth's appea
• Curtis v. Boeger
  331 F.2d 675· 8th Cir.· 1964-03-06 ·cited 8×
  Appellants were not required to petition the Supreme Court for a writ of certiorari before seeking a hearing on their habeas corpus claims in federal district court.
• United States ex rel. Charles Emerick v. Honorable Wilfred Denno
  328 F.2d 309· 2d Cir.· 1964-02-27 ·cited 8×
  A state prisoner must seek a writ of coram nobis to demonstrate exhaustion of state remedies before federal habeas corpus relief is available.
• Hilderbrand v. Taylor
  327 F.2d 205· 10th Cir.· 1964-01-31 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the federal court had jurisdiction over crimes committed by an Indian within the exterior boundaries of an Indian reservation, even if the crime occurred on land patented to a non-Indian.
• Barber v. Gladden
  327 F.2d 101· 9th Cir.· 1964-01-29 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the indictment was constitutionally sufficient and that the appellant's factual contentions regarding coercion, judicial bias, and improper sentencing influences were not supported by the evidence and were not clearly erroneous.
• Adam v. Hagan
  325 F.2d 719· 5th Cir.· 1963-12-26 ·cited 8×
  The court held that a prior denial of relief under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 does not, by itself, render the remedy inadequate or ineffective to allow resort to habeas corpus.
• Nash v. Warden Reincke
  325 F.2d 310· 2d Cir.· 1963-12-12 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court did not err in dismissing Nash's habeas corpus petition without a hearing, as prior applications had been fully litigated on the merits and no new grounds or miscarriage of justice were shown.
• Hooper v. Nash
  323 F.2d 995· 8th Cir.· 1963-10-28 ·cited 8×
  The court held that a Missouri prisoner must exhaust state remedies under Rule 27.26 before seeking federal habeas corpus relief.
• Gailes v. Yeager
  324 F.2d 630· 3d Cir.· 1963-10-17 ·cited 8×
  The court held that a writ of habeas corpus cannot be used to challenge a sentence that has not yet begun to run.
• United States ex rel. Frank Gaito v. Maroney
  324 F.2d 673· 3d Cir.· 1963-10-08 ·cited 8×
  The court denied the petition for rehearing, finding that the issue of parole revocation grounds is likely to be addressed in pending state court proceedings.
• United States ex rel. Floyd Edgar Martin v. Murphy
  319 F.2d 897· 2d Cir.· 1963-07-02 ·cited 8×
  Federal habeas corpus relief is unavailable because the relator has not exhausted his state remedies by seeking a writ of error coram nobis.
• United States ex rel. Robert L. Burage v. Pate
  316 F.2d 582· 7th Cir.· 1963-04-23 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the petitioner's attorney's questioning invited the testimony about prior imprisonment, and therefore, no federal constitutional rights were violated.
• Sharp v. The State OF Ohio
  314 F.2d 799· 6th Cir.· 1963-03-18 ·cited 8×
  The court held that a petitioner alleging lack of counsel and understanding of a guilty plea is entitled to a hearing.
• Miller v. Taylor
  313 F.2d 21· 10th Cir.· 1962-12-22 ·cited 8×
  The court held that an erroneous early release due to a miscalculation of good time allowances does not divest the Parole Board of jurisdiction to revoke a conditional release.