Habeas Corpus

18,787 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 3,112 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• Myrick v. Herb Maschner & the Attorney Gen. of the State of Kan.
  799 F.2d 642· 10th Cir.· 1986-08-29 ·cited 4×·via Habeas Corpus Relief
  The court held that a constitutionally deficient jury instruction regarding intent was harmless error because the evidence overwhelmingly established the petitioner's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, and the instruction did not affect the verdict. The court also held that the pet
• Red Martin Cain v. Petrovsky
  798 F.2d 1194· 8th Cir.· 1986-08-20 ·cited 4×
  The court held that federal courts lack jurisdiction under § 2241 to grant relief for violations of state law or state speedy trial provisions, and that jail time served in connection with a dropped federal charge is not creditable against a federal sentence for unrelated offense
• Wickstrom v. Schardt
  798 F.2d 268· 7th Cir.· 1986-08-19 ·cited 4×
  The court affirmed the dismissal of the habeas corpus petition because at least one claim was unexhausted and the petitioner was no longer in custody.
• Tyree v. J.D. White
  796 F.2d 390· 11th Cir.· 1986-08-11 ·cited 4×
  The court affirmed the denial of habeas corpus on four claims but reversed and remanded for an evidentiary hearing on the claim of an unconstitutionally disproportionate sentence.
• Wilby Frank Summit v. Blackburn
  795 F.2d 1237· 5th Cir.· 1986-08-07 ·cited 4×
  The court held that trial counsel's failure to raise the corpus delicti rule regarding the attempted armed robbery constituted ineffective assistance of counsel, and this deficiency prejudiced the defendant.
• Bradshaw v. O.L. McCOTTER
  796 F.2d 100· 5th Cir.· 1986-08-06 ·cited 4×
  A judge should not be required to recuse themselves based solely on appearances when there is no actual bias or question of impartiality.
• McCOY v. Cabana
  794 F.2d 177· 5th Cir.· 1986-07-11 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the petitioner's constitutional rights were not violated during his state court conviction, affirming the denial of his habeas corpus petition.
• Daniel v. Warden, State Corr. Inst. AT Huntingdon, PA. & the Attorney Gen. of the State of Pa. Appeal of John Robert Daniel
  794 F.2d 880· 3d Cir.· 1986-07-08 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court erred in applying the presumption of correctness under 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d) to the state court's determination of the double jeopardy claim, but affirmed the denial of the writ because the double jeopardy claim lacked merit.
• Holland v. Scully
  797 F.2d 57· 2d Cir.· 1986-07-07 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the admission of co-defendants' confessions, in light of the Supreme Court's decision in Lee v. Illinois, constituted a Bruton violation that could not be considered harmless error.
• Bautista v. O.L. McCOTTER
  793 F.2d 109· 5th Cir.· 1986-06-30 ·cited 4×
  A Texas inmate seeking federal habeas relief has not exhausted state remedies if they failed to petition the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals for review of their conviction, even if review is discretionary.
• Holley v. Smith
  792 F.2d 1046· 11th Cir.· 1986-06-30 ·cited 4×
  A sentence of life without parole under Alabama's Habitual Felony Offender Act for a violent Class A felony, following multiple prior felony convictions, is not unconstitutionally disproportionate under the Eighth Amendment.
• Lovely v. Cunningham
  796 F.2d 1· 1st Cir.· 1986-06-24 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the New Hampshire Supreme Court's construction of the Aggravated Felonious Sexual Assault statute, including threats of economic reprisal within the definition of extortion, was not unforeseeable and thus did not violate due process principles of ex post facto
• Black v. State
  490 So. 2d 1287· Fla. 1st DCA· 1986-06-18 ·cited 4×
• Shuman v. Wolff
  791 F.2d 788· 9th Cir.· 1986-06-12 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the admission of a codefendant's confession in a 1958 murder trial constituted harmless error, and that Nevada's mandatory death penalty statute for a person serving a life sentence violated the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments.
• Nason Gene Soileau v. Blackburn
  789 F.2d 1209· 5th Cir.· 1986-05-21 ·cited 4×
  A Rule 9(a) dismissal of a habeas corpus petition is inappropriate without providing the petitioner notice and an opportunity to be heard.
• Patterson v. Black
  791 F.2d 107· 8th Cir.· 1986-05-16 ·cited 4×
  The court affirmed the district court's judgment.
• Norfleet Lucas v. Hadden
  790 F.2d 365· 3d Cir.· 1986-05-14 ·cited 4×
  A federal court cannot grant bail to a state prisoner seeking habeas corpus relief absent extraordinary circumstances, especially when state remedies have not been exhausted.
• Davis v. United States
  790 F.2d 716· 8th Cir.· 1986-05-14 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the Bureau of Prisons' policy of treating the sentence imposed upon revocation of probation as cumulative to the time already served under a split sentence is permissible, absent explicit direction from the sentencing court to the contrary.
• Campbell v. A.L. Lockhart
  789 F.2d 644· 8th Cir.· 1986-04-30 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the trial court's acceptance of a guilty plea did not violate due process, and the defendant's counsel did not provide ineffective assistance.
• Seccia v. Louie L. Wainwright
  487 So. 2d 1156· Fla. 1st DCA· 1986-04-23 ·cited 4×
  Richard Seccia appeals the dismissal of his habeas corpus petition, which was filed by a fellow inmate acting as his "next friend." The court reversed the dismissal, holding that habeas corpus petitions may be filed by a friend or agent on behalf of a detained person, and that co
• Funchess v. Louie L. Wainwright
  486 So. 2d 592· Fla.· 1986-04-17 ·cited 4×
  David Livingston Funchess petitioned for a writ of habeas corpus and stay of execution following his 1975 conviction for two counts of first-degree murder. The Florida Supreme Court denied both requests, holding that Funchess's challenge to death-qualified juries was procedurally
• Thomas v. State
  486 So. 2d 577· Fla.· 1986-04-14 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the appellant's current claims were procedurally barred as they should have been raised at trial, on appeal, or in prior collateral challenges. The trial court correctly denied the motion for post-conviction relief without an evidentiary hearing.
• Breeland v. Blackburn
  786 F.2d 1239· 5th Cir.· 1986-04-11 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the denial of severance was not an abuse of discretion, as the appellant failed to demonstrate prejudice sufficient to warrant relief under Fed. R. Crim. P. 14.
• Dutton v. Brown
  788 F.2d 669· 10th Cir.· 1986-04-11 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the petitioner's constitutional rights were not violated during his state trial, and therefore, his petition for a writ of habeas corpus was properly denied. The court affirmed the district court's judgment.
• Greenawalt v. Ricketts
  784 F.2d 1453· 9th Cir.· 1986-03-20 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the case was governed by Shea v. Louisiana, meaning Edwards v. Arizona applied to Greenawalt's questioning because his petition for certiorari was pending when Edwards was decided.
• Roscoe Smith v. The Confederated Tribes OF the Warm Springs Reservation OF Or.
  783 F.2d 1409· 9th Cir.· 1986-03-04 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the Tribal Court commenced proceedings within the mandated sixty days and that the district court erred in granting a writ of habeas corpus, as the Tribal Court's actions were not demonstrably not expeditious.
• Breest v. Cunningham
  784 F.2d 435· 1st Cir.· 1986-02-28 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the petitioner failed to meet the 'cause' and 'prejudice' requirements for federal habeas corpus relief, affirming the denial of the writ.
• Frisco v. Blackburn
  782 F.2d 1353· 5th Cir.· 1986-02-21 ·cited 4×
  The admission of evidence from an uncounseled pre-trial lineup identification, and the subsequent in-court identification without a hearing to determine independent origin, constitutes a violation of the Sixth Amendment and requires reversal.
• Isaacs v. Kemp
  782 F.2d 896· 11th Cir.· 1986-01-31 ·cited 4×
  The court denied a petition for rehearing and suggestion for rehearing en banc.
• Bradburn v. O.L. McCOTTER
  786 F.2d 627· 5th Cir.· 1986-01-28 ·cited 4×
  The state waived its exhaustion defense by not raising it in the district court, and the petitioner's Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination was not violated by police questioning.
• United States v. Clark
  781 F.2d 730· 9th Cir.· 1986-01-27 ·cited 4×
  The court held that a prosecutor's recommendation regarding parole eligibility, made after sentencing and to the Parole Commission, does not violate a plea agreement where the agreement only promised not to make a recommendation regarding the sentence itself.
• Myers v. Linwood V. Stephenson
  781 F.2d 1036· 4th Cir.· 1986-01-16 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the prisoner's notice of appeal was timely filed due to excusable neglect and the district court's sua sponte extension, and that an evidentiary hearing is required on the claim of a guilty plea based on misinformation.
• Carter v. Attorney General OF the United States
  782 F.2d 138· 10th Cir.· 1986-01-09 ·cited 4×
  The court held that a district court lacks jurisdiction to grant a writ of error coram nobis for a conviction obtained in a different federal district court, and that claims attacking an injunction issued by a federal court in another circuit are barred by collateral estoppel.
• Petty v. O.L. McCOTTER
  779 F.2d 299· 5th Cir.· 1986-01-03 ·cited 4×
  The court held that a pro se petitioner should be allowed to amend his complaint to allege facts supporting his claim of ineffective assistance of counsel, even if those facts are raised for the first time on appeal.
• Reed Wayne Hamilton v. Crispus NIX
  781 F.2d 619· 8th Cir.· 1985-12-31 ·cited 4×
  The dissenting judge argues that the Iowa Supreme Court's findings regarding the independent source doctrine should be presumed correct under 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d), and that the majority improperly disregarded these findings.
• Crowley v. Landon
  780 F.2d 440· 4th Cir.· 1985-12-26 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the petitioners' reincarceration did not violate their constitutional rights to equal protection, due process, or protection against ex post facto laws or cruel and unusual punishment.
• Watson v. Marshall
  784 F.2d 722· 6th Cir.· 1985-12-26 ·cited 4×·via Habeas Corpus Relief
  The dissenting judge believes the prosecutor's actions and defense counsel's inactions deprived the appellant of a fair trial, warranting a retrial or release.
• Ashford v. Edwards
  780 F.2d 405· 4th Cir.· 1985-12-17 ·cited 4×·via Federal Habeas Corpus
  Convicting a defendant of two counts of attempted armed robbery is not a violation of the federal double jeopardy clause when the evidence shows threats and demands made to two separate victims, even if the property sought belonged to a partnership.
• Corbett v. Luther
  778 F.2d 950· 2d Cir.· 1985-12-09 ·cited 4×
  The Commission's appeal is dismissed as moot because the D.C. court reduced Corbett's sentence, rendering the issue academic; Corbett's cross-appeal is affirmed in part and dismissed in part regarding sentence computation.
• Abelino Rodriguez v. Ricketts
  777 F.2d 527· 9th Cir.· 1985-12-02 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the Due Process Clause does not require state courts to establish a factual basis for a guilty plea absent special circumstances, and that no conflict of interest affected the adequacy of appellate representation.
• Scott v. United States
  778 F.2d 1444· 10th Cir.· 1985-11-25 ·cited 4×
  An offender sentenced under the Youth Corrections Act who violates parole is not entitled to good time credits for improper incarceration, even if the improper incarceration was a violation of the Act.
• Ballou v. Booker
  777 F.2d 910· 4th Cir.· 1985-11-20 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the defendant was not competently represented due to his counsel's deficient performance, which prejudiced his defense.
• Bryant v. Warden, Metro. Corr. Ctr. OF NEW York City & United States Parole Comm'n
  776 F.2d 394· 2d Cir.· 1985-11-01 ·cited 4×
  The court held that extra time served on a prior parole violator term due to an error cannot be 'banked' to offset a sentence imposed for a subsequent parole violation.
• Walberg v. Israel
  776 F.2d 134· 7th Cir.· 1985-10-23 ·cited 4×
  The court denied the application for bail, finding that the presumption in favor of bail pending review was rebutted.
• Ophelia and Gary McCASKILL v. Vera and Toma McCASKILL
  477 So. 2d 36· Fla. 2d DCA· 1985-10-18 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the trial court improperly granted a writ of habeas corpus in a child custody dispute because the petition failed to properly invoke the court's jurisdiction under Chapter 39, Florida Statutes.
• Baughn v. L.L. Wainwright
  476 So. 2d 792· Fla. 1st DCA· 1985-10-18 ·cited 4×
  The court held that a motion to correct sentence, not a petition for habeas corpus, is the proper remedy for a sentencing error, and that concurrent sentences are subsumed by the longer term.
• Schaeffer v. Black
  774 F.2d 865· 8th Cir.· 1985-10-01 ·cited 4×·via Habeas Corpus Relief
  The court held that a habeas petitioner claiming ineffective assistance of counsel due to external constraints must still demonstrate actual prejudice, and that state court factual findings are entitled to a presumption of correctness.
• Collins v. A.L. Lockhart
  771 F.2d 1580· 8th Cir.· 1985-09-11 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the Arkansas legislature did not intend to prohibit cumulative punishments for theft and aggravated robbery arising from a single incident, thus the double jeopardy clause was not violated.
• Shepard v. Foltz
  771 F.2d 962· 6th Cir.· 1985-08-30 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court properly denied the habeas corpus petition because the petitioner failed to meet the 'cause and prejudice' standard required for federal review of claims procedurally defaulted in state court.
• Bronson v. Fla. Parole & Prob. Comm'n
  474 So. 2d 409· Fla. 1st DCA· 1985-08-22 ·cited 4×
  The court held that a writ of habeas corpus cannot be used to compel a public agency to exercise its discretion in a specific manner, and unsupported allegations are insufficient for relief.