Habeas Corpus

18,792 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 3,111 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• Titus Lee Brown, Jr. v. Borg
  951 F.2d 1011· 9th Cir.· 1991-12-06 ·cited 2×
  A conviction obtained through the knowing use of false evidence by the prosecution, which is not harmless beyond a reasonable doubt, violates due process and must be overturned.
• Felk v. Dugger
  589 So. 2d 905· Fla.· 1991-12-05 ·cited 2×
  The court held that section 944.277(1), Florida Statutes (Supp.1988), does not violate the ex post facto clauses when applied to an inmate whose offenses occurred prior to its effective date.
• Weaver v. State OF Iowa
  949 F.2d 1049· 8th Cir.· 1991-11-27 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the defendant's conviction for burglary was constitutional and that the trial court properly refused his jury instruction and that the victim's identification was reliable.
• Bennett v. Armontrout
  949 F.2d 1017· 8th Cir.· 1991-11-26 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the appellant's federal habeas claims are procedurally barred because he failed to demonstrate cause and prejudice for his default in state court.
• Mendez v. Collins
  947 F.2d 189· 5th Cir.· 1991-11-18 ·cited 2×
  A jury instruction regarding parole eligibility, even if discussed by the jury, does not constitute a constitutional violation.
• Harris v. Vasquez
  943 F.2d 930· 9th Cir.· 1991-11-15 ·cited 2×
  The court affirmed the district court's denial of the habeas corpus petition, finding no constitutional error in the prior proceedings.
• Fassler v. U.S. Parole Comm'n
  964 F.2d 877· 9th Cir.· 1991-11-14 ·cited 2×
  The Sentencing Reform Act of 1984 (SRA) does not repeal or preempt the requirement that a prisoner serve one-third of their sentence before being eligible for parole under 18 U.S.C. § 4205(a).
• Couch v. Jabe
  951 F.2d 94· 6th Cir.· 1991-11-01 ·cited 2×·via Federal Habeas Corpus
  The court held that the case should be remanded to determine if the presumption of procedural default under Ylst v. Nunnemaker is rebutted, and to allow consolidation of all claims.
• Harris v. A.L. Lockhart
  948 F.2d 450· 8th Cir.· 1991-10-31 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the appellant's federal habeas claims were procedurally defaulted because they were not presented to the state courts in a timely or procedurally correct manner, and the appellant failed to demonstrate cause for the default or actual innocence.
• Cain v. Redman
  947 F.2d 817· 6th Cir.· 1991-10-24 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the petitioner could not retroactively apply the Supreme Court's decision in Sandstrom v. Montana to his conviction because it announced a new rule of law that does not fall within the Teague v. Lane exceptions, and any error in the jury instructions was harml
• Wright v. U.S. Parole Comm'n
  948 F.2d 433· 8th Cir.· 1991-10-24 ·cited 2×
  The court should have reviewed the Parole Commission's decision for abuse of discretion, and Wright's due process rights were violated.
• Reilly v. Warden, FCI Petersburg
  947 F.2d 43· 2d Cir.· 1991-10-23 ·cited 2×
  A violation of the Interstate Agreement on Detainers (IAD) is not a ground for relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2254.
• Elcock v. Henderson
  947 F.2d 1004· 2d Cir.· 1991-10-17 ·cited 2×
  The court held that while a due process violation occurred due to appellate delay, unconditional release was not warranted without a showing of prejudice to the appeal's outcome. The Sixth Amendment claim based on attorney conflict of interest required further factual findings.
• Morgan v. Bernie Aispuro
  946 F.2d 1462· 9th Cir.· 1991-10-15 ·cited 2×
  The use of a security courtroom, absent actual prejudice, is not inherently prejudicial and does not violate a defendant's right to a fair trial.
• Reese v. Fulcomer
  946 F.2d 247· 3d Cir.· 1991-10-15 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court did not err in relying on state court findings for ineffective assistance of counsel claims, as the underlying facts were supported by the record and the petitioner failed to rebut the presumption of correctness.
• Lewis v. Erickson
  946 F.2d 1361· 8th Cir.· 1991-10-15 ·cited 2×·via Habeas Corpus Petition
  The court held that newly discovered evidence, specifically the victim's recantation of her identification of Lewis's co-assailant, would likely produce an acquittal on retrial and thus warrants habeas relief.
• Griffin v. Delo
  946 F.2d 1356· 8th Cir.· 1991-10-11 ·cited 2×·via Procedural Default In Habeas Corpus
  The court affirmed the denial of the habeas corpus petition, finding no constitutional error in the admission of evidence, ineffective assistance of counsel, or prosecutorial misconduct.
• Graham v. Hoke
  946 F.2d 982· 2d Cir.· 1991-10-03 ·cited 2×
  The Court of Appeals held that the Cruz rule regarding the admission of codefendant confessions in joint trials should be applied retroactively, but that the admission of the codefendant's confession in this case was harmless error given the strength of the other evidence.
• Jones v. Murray
  947 F.2d 1106· 4th Cir.· 1991-10-01 ·cited 2×
  The court affirmed the denial of the habeas corpus petition, finding no constitutional error in the denial of the petition or the underlying state court judgment.
• Roehler v. Borg
  945 F.2d 303· 9th Cir.· 1991-09-24 ·cited 2×
  The court held that sufficient evidence existed to support the jury's verdict of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, thus affirming the denial of habeas corpus relief.
• Hernandez v. Rayl
  944 F.2d 794· 10th Cir.· 1991-09-16 ·cited 2×
  The court held that an unconstitutional jury instruction shifting the burden of proving intent cannot be considered harmless error when the evidence does not compel a guilty verdict independently of the presumption.
• Bentzel v. State
  585 So. 2d 1118· Fla. 1st DCA· 1991-09-12 ·cited 2×
  Appellant Bentzel challenged his extradition to North Carolina and appealed the denial of his petition for habeas corpus, arguing he was entitled to court-appointed counsel. The Florida appellate court reversed, holding that section 941.10(1) of Florida's extradition law statutor
• Dante Todaro # AJ-1779 v. Fulcomer
  944 F.2d 1079· 3d Cir.· 1991-09-10 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the state trial court's fact-finding procedure afforded the defendant a full and fair hearing, and the district court did not err in denying an evidentiary hearing on the habeas corpus petition.
• Shore v. Warden, Stateville Prison
  942 F.2d 1117· 7th Cir.· 1991-08-30 ·cited 2×
  The district court erred in granting habeas corpus relief because it improperly applied the standard of review and disregarded the law of the case doctrine.
• Chestnut v. Magnusson
  942 F.2d 820· 1st Cir.· 1991-08-29 ·cited 2×·via Habeas Corpus Petition
  A state's failure to provide good-time credits for pretrial detention, while allowing them for sentenced prisoners, does not violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
• Stevenson v. Thornburgh
  943 F.2d 1214· 10th Cir.· 1991-08-29 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the petitioner's claims are controlled by the prior decision in Blango v. Thornburgh, and that the transfer did not violate the compact clause.
• Fitzgerald v. Thompson
  943 F.2d 463· 4th Cir.· 1991-08-26 ·cited 2×
  The court affirmed the district court's dismissal of the habeas corpus petition, finding no error in the conviction or sentencing.
• Coy Arthur Hill v. Reynolds
  942 F.2d 1494· 10th Cir.· 1991-08-23 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the state's significant delay in adjudicating the petitioner's direct criminal appeal violates his due process rights and excuses him from the requirement to exhaust state remedies before seeking federal habeas corpus relief.
• Leichman v. Sec'y, La. Dep't OF Corr.
  939 F.2d 315· 5th Cir.· 1991-08-23 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the systematic exclusion of women from jury service violated the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments, entitling the appellant to relief.
• Reese v. Crispus C. NIX
  942 F.2d 1276· 8th Cir.· 1991-08-22 ·cited 2×
• Derick Peterson v. Murray
  949 F.2d 704· 4th Cir.· 1991-08-22 ·cited 2×
  The court vacated the district court's temporary stay of execution, finding the petitioner's claims procedurally defaulted and barred by doctrines concerning successive petitions and new rules.
• Bennie Cunningham v. Peters
  941 F.2d 535· 7th Cir.· 1991-08-21 ·cited 2×
  The court should have allowed the jury to hear a third-party confession that was reliable, despite hearsay rules, to assist in separating the guilty from the innocent.
• Girtman v. A.L. Lockhart
  942 F.2d 468· 8th Cir.· 1991-08-08 ·cited 2×
  The court held that while the conviction is affirmed, the sentence as a habitual offender must be reversed and remanded because the trial court may have unconstitutionally failed to hold a hearing before transferring the juvenile Girtman to adult court.
• Jones v. A.L. Lockhart
  940 F.2d 378· 8th Cir.· 1991-08-05 ·cited 2×
  The court affirmed the district court's denial of habeas relief but remanded to allow the petitioner to amend his petition to include a new claim regarding ineffective assistance of counsel for misadvice on parole eligibility.
• Junior Brown v. Collins
  937 F.2d 175· 5th Cir.· 1991-08-02 ·cited 2×·via Federal Habeas Corpus
  A technical violation of state law requiring evidence to conform to the jury charge's specific theory of culpability does not rise to the level of a constitutional violation cognizable in federal habeas corpus, especially when the evidence is sufficient to prove the substantive e
• Rapheld v. Delo
  940 F.2d 324· 8th Cir.· 1991-07-31 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the petitioner failed to show actual innocence to excuse the abuse of the writ in filing a successive habeas petition.
• Young v. Puckett
  938 F.2d 562· 5th Cir.· 1991-07-26 ·cited 2×
  The court held that because the prior conviction was not constitutionally infirm, the petitioner's claim that he was forced to testify due to a tainted conviction is meritless, and the petition is affirmed as successive.
• Swift v. State
  582 So. 2d 146· Fla. 3d DCA· 1991-07-09 ·cited 2×
  The court affirmed the trial court's denial of habeas corpus relief because the appellant's motion for post-conviction relief challenging ineffective assistance of counsel was filed more than three years after the statutory deadline under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850.
• Mata v. Ricketts
  937 F.2d 467· 9th Cir.· 1991-07-01 ·cited 2×
  The admission of a nontestifying codefendant's confession was harmless error beyond a reasonable doubt, and therefore, habeas corpus relief is denied.
• Ballard v. Estelle
  937 F.2d 453· 9th Cir.· 1991-06-26 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the appellant's sentence enhancement for firearm use was consistent with California law and did not violate due process, and that California law permits gun use findings to attach to all counts arising from a single criminal transaction where a firearm was per
• Avera v. State
  582 So. 2d 93· Fla. 1st DCA· 1991-06-26 ·cited 2×
  Robert Avera, an inmate, challenged the Department of Corrections' revocation of 293 days of gain time following his 1981 escape. The court reversed the summary denial of his habeas corpus petition, holding that under Florida law, only gain time earned prior to an escape can be f
• Burt v. Puckett
  933 F.2d 350· 5th Cir.· 1991-06-17 ·cited 2×
  A fifteen-year sentence for uttering a forged check, imposed under a habitual offender statute, does not violate the Eighth Amendment's prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment when compared to Supreme Court precedent.
• Bird v. Collins
  934 F.2d 629· 5th Cir.· 1991-06-16 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the petitioner did not present a substantial legal question regarding actual innocence of a death sentence to warrant further review.
• Riggins v. Norris W. McMACKIN
  935 F.2d 790· 6th Cir.· 1991-06-10 ·cited 2×
  The court held that a federal court must remand for an evidentiary hearing to determine if a state prisoner was aware of the maximum possible sentence when entering a guilty plea, even if the state court found substantial compliance with its rules.
• Waterbury v. Crispus NIX
  935 F.2d 943· 8th Cir.· 1991-06-05 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the appellant procedurally defaulted on his claims of instructional error by failing to make contemporaneous objections at trial, and that his arguments for excusing this default were unavailing.
• Neftali Perez v. Jones
  935 F.2d 480· 2d Cir.· 1991-06-05 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the prosecutor's cross-examination of a defense witness, which led the witness to invoke his Fifth Amendment privilege, did not violate the defendant's due process or Sixth Amendment rights.
• Lyndell Scroggins v. A.L. Lockhart
  934 F.2d 972· 8th Cir.· 1991-06-04 ·cited 2×
  The court held that a federal habeas corpus petitioner must demonstrate cause and prejudice for a procedural default, and that claims of ineffective assistance of counsel not presented to state courts cannot establish cause.
• Boudreaux v. Dugger
  579 So. 2d 918· Fla. 1st DCA· 1991-06-03 ·cited 2×
• Turner v. United States Parole Comm'n
  934 F.2d 254· 10th Cir.· 1991-05-24 ·cited 2×
  The Parole Commission has the statutory authority to issue a second parole violator warrant based on a new conviction, even if a prior warrant was issued for the same underlying conduct but resulted in conditional reinstatement due to insufficient evidence.
• Sherley v. Seabold
  929 F.2d 272· 6th Cir.· 1991-05-24 ·cited 2×·via Writ Of Habeas Corpus
  The court held that the admission of hearsay testimony violated the petitioner's Sixth Amendment confrontation clause rights because the prosecution failed to demonstrate the witness's unavailability with a good-faith effort and the hearsay lacked sufficient indicia of reliabilit