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

• Manning v. Alexander
  912 F.2d 878· 6th Cir.· 1990-08-31 ·cited 2×
  The Sixth Circuit held that Manning adequately presented his ineffective assistance of appellate counsel claim to the Supreme Court of Ohio, thus exhausting his state remedies.
• Jeffries v. Crispus C. NIX
  912 F.2d 982· 8th Cir.· 1990-08-30 ·cited 2×·via Habeas Corpus Petition
  The court held that the trial court properly excluded evidence of the victim's past sexual behavior under the rape shield law, and any error in excluding evidence of delusions was harmless.
• Ostrosky v. State OF Alaska
  913 F.2d 590· 9th Cir.· 1990-08-28 ·cited 2×
  The court held that prosecuting Ostrosky after a lower court declared the statute unconstitutional, but while that decision was on appeal, did not violate due process, and that Ostrosky waived his right to a jury trial on his mistake of law defense.
• Vince Coleman v. R.E. Honsted
  908 F.2d 906· 11th Cir.· 1990-08-13 ·cited 2×
  The Parole Commission may rely on controverted portions of a presentence investigation report if it finds them accurate, and the Sentencing Reform Act did not mandate release within a specific guideline range.
• Miles v. Crispus NIX
  911 F.2d 146· 8th Cir.· 1990-08-13 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court correctly denied the habeas corpus petition because the jury instructions, when read as a whole, adequately informed the jury of the essential elements of the crime, and the other claims lacked merit.
• Welch v. Fritz
  909 F.2d 1330· 9th Cir.· 1990-07-27 ·cited 2×
  The appeal from the civil rights action dismissal is dismissed as untimely, and the dismissal of the habeas corpus petition is affirmed.
• Hamblen v. Dugger
  748 F. Supp. 1497· M.D. Fla.· 1990-07-16 ·cited 2×·via Federal Habeas Corpus
  The court held that it never had jurisdiction over the original habeas petition because the 'next friend' did not establish standing, rendering a Rule 60(b) motion unnecessary and unavailable.
• Hamblen v. Dugger
  748 F. Supp. 1498· M.D. Fla.· 1990-07-16 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the petitioner failed to demonstrate a constitutional violation regarding cruel and unusual punishment during execution or improper resentencing procedures, and thus denied the petition for habeas corpus and stay of execution.
• Larson v. United States
  907 F.2d 85· 8th Cir.· 1990-07-06 ·cited 2×
  The court held that federal courts lack jurisdiction to review the substantive decisions of the Parole Commission for abuse of discretion, except for violations of the Parole Act or the Constitution.
• Munz v. Crispus C. NIX
  908 F.2d 267· 8th Cir.· 1990-07-05 ·cited 2×
  The court should affirm the stay and allow the district court to consider remaining issues after state exhaustion.
• Hunter v. Clark
  906 F.2d 302· 7th Cir.· 1990-07-03 ·cited 2×
  The majority holds that a defendant waived his constitutional right to a no-adverse-inference instruction by declining the trial court's offer of severance. The dissenting judge argues this holding contravenes Supreme Court precedent and principles of waiver.
• Alexzene Hamilton v. Collins
  905 F.2d 825· 5th Cir.· 1990-06-25 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court correctly dismissed the habeas petition because the state court's findings of competency were fairly supported by the record and thus binding. The court denied the stay of execution and affirmed the dismissal.
• Martin v. Kaiser
  907 F.2d 931· 10th Cir.· 1990-06-21 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the petitioner's claims of jurisdictional error, improper admission of evidence, limitations on cross-examination, and sentencing issues did not rise to the level of constitutional error required for habeas corpus relief.
• Mattox v. State
  563 So. 2d 793· Fla. 1st DCA· 1990-06-21 ·cited 2×
  Anthony Mattox appealed the summary denial of his combined motions for post-conviction relief, claiming prosecutorial misconduct through non-disclosure of fingerprint evidence and an allegedly exculpatory evidence report, and challenging his habitual offender sentence. The Florid
• Smith v. Dugger
  758 F. Supp. 688· N.D. Fla.· 1990-06-08 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the state's argument that a prior finding of no prejudice under Strickland v. Washington automatically renders a Hitchcock error harmless is incorrect, as the tactical decisions were made under the law as it existed at the time, and the subsequent change in la
• Ford v. A.L. Lockhart
  904 F.2d 458· 8th Cir.· 1990-06-04 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the defendant received effective assistance of counsel and his guilty plea was voluntary, knowing, and intelligent.
• Sandsbury LEE v. Dugger
  902 F.2d 822· 11th Cir.· 1990-06-04 ·cited 2×·via Writ Of Habeas Corpus
  Government officials are entitled to qualified immunity if their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights. A single intermediate appellate court decision construing a statute is insufficient to establish clarity for qualified immunity purpos
• Rumble v. Smith
  905 F.2d 176· 8th Cir.· 1990-05-29 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the denial of a habeas corpus petition was proper because the defendant was not denied due process by being convicted of felony murder when indicted for capital murder, nor by the refusal to instruct on duress.
• Wilton Howell v. W.R. Barker
  904 F.2d 889· 4th Cir.· 1990-05-24 ·cited 2×
  A defendant seeking due process relief for preindictment delay must prove actual prejudice, after which the court balances the prejudice against the government's justification for the delay.
• Richter v. Fairbanks
  903 F.2d 1202· 8th Cir.· 1990-05-23 ·cited 2×
• Pens v. Kit Bail
  902 F.2d 1464· 9th Cir.· 1990-05-16 ·cited 2×
  The court held that using statements made by a defendant during court-ordered, confidential therapy to impose an exceptional sentence violates the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination.
• Hafley v. Sowders
  902 F.2d 480· 6th Cir.· 1990-05-15 ·cited 2×
  The court held that one claim was exhausted and meritorious, while the remaining six ineffective assistance of counsel claims were unexhausted. The court affirmed dismissal of unexhausted claims and dismissal of the exhausted claim on its merits.
• Harriman v. Lynn
  901 F.2d 64· 5th Cir.· 1990-05-15 ·cited 2×·via Application For Writ Of Habeas Corpus
  The court held that the Supreme Court's decision in Arizona v. Roberson, which prohibited further interrogation after a suspect invokes the right to counsel, announced a "new rule" and therefore does not apply retroactively to cases on collateral review where the conviction was f
• Smith v. Honorable Richard J. Cadagin
  902 F.2d 553· 7th Cir.· 1990-05-14 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the prosecutor's cross-examination about the defendant's characterization of the incident did not violate Doyle v. Ohio because the defendant had made post-arrest statements about the event, and the questioning sought an explanation for an arguably inconsisten
• Henderson v. Smith
  903 F.2d 534· 8th Cir.· 1990-05-09 ·cited 2×
  The court held that a defendant in state court can validly waive their Sixth Amendment right to conflict-free counsel without an on-the-record inquiry, provided the waiver is knowing, voluntary, and intelligent.
• Capps v. Collins
  900 F.2d 58· 5th Cir.· 1990-05-04 ·cited 2×·via Habeas Corpus Petition
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction, the exclusion of irrelevant evidence did not violate the right to confrontation, and counsel was not ineffective for failing to introduce inadmissible evidence.
• Epps v. State of Iowa
  901 F.2d 1481· 8th Cir.· 1990-05-02 ·cited 2×
  The court affirmed the denial of the habeas petition, finding no constitutional violation regarding the change of venue and no ineffective assistance of counsel.
• Braley v. Shillinger
  902 F.2d 20· 10th Cir.· 1990-04-30 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the state court's refusal to permit inquiry into alleged improper jury influence did not infringe the Sixth Amendment right to a fair jury, and the state court's finding of no bias was conclusive.
• Winford Stokes v. Armontrout
  901 F.2d 1460· 8th Cir.· 1990-04-24 ·cited 2×
• Collins v. State
  559 So. 2d 1276· Fla. 2d DCA· 1990-04-18 ·cited 2×
  Eddie Collins sought habeas corpus relief as a pretrial detainee challenging the adequacy of his court-appointed counsel. The Florida appellate court dismissed his appeal, holding that habeas corpus is not the proper remedy for challenging counsel's representation and that such c
• Hunt v. Vasquez
  899 F.2d 878· 9th Cir.· 1990-04-11 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court erred in ordering the state to apply superseded law to the reinstated appeal, as habeas corpus remedies federal rights, not state law regimes.
• Radislaw Blazic v. Henderson
  900 F.2d 534· 2d Cir.· 1990-04-02 ·cited 2×
  The court held that while New York law likely warranted a justification charge based on the evidence of an accidental shooting during a struggle, the omission of such a charge did not violate due process because it would not have affected the jury's verdict.
• Adcox v. O'Brien
  899 F.2d 735· 8th Cir.· 1990-03-30 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court must reconsider the appellant's motions to suppress evidence and confession, as a favorable ruling might have altered the appellant's decision to plead guilty.
• Brown v. Armontrout
  898 F.2d 84· 8th Cir.· 1990-03-16 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the appellant's claims lacked merit, affirming the district court's denial of his habeas corpus petition.
• Lawrence v. Edilberto Pestana
  560 So. 2d 248· Fla. 3d DCA· 1990-03-06 ·cited 2×
  The court held that a complaint sworn before a magistrate satisfies the statutory requirement for an authenticated affidavit in extradition demands, and the asylum state cannot re-examine the demanding state's probable cause determination.
• Lindsey v. Wells
  901 F.2d 96· 8th Cir.· 1990-03-05 ·cited 2×
  The court held that a claim attacking the fact or length of confinement requires exhaustion of state remedies before federal court intervention.
• Whittlesey v. Cir. Court FOR Baltimore Cnty.
  897 F.2d 143· 4th Cir.· 1990-02-28 ·cited 2×
  A federal habeas corpus petitioner who escapes from state prison and commits crimes in another state, thereby preventing the state courts from having a full and fair opportunity to consider his claims, has not exhausted state remedies.
• McCartney v. Vitek
  902 F.2d 616· 8th Cir.· 1990-02-07 ·cited 2×
  The court held that a federal court may dismiss a habeas petition for failure to exhaust state remedies, even before the state has responded, if the state indicates it will not waive the exhaustion requirement.
• Bateson v. Dugger
  556 So. 2d 498· Fla. 1st DCA· 1990-02-06 ·cited 2×·via Writ Of Habeas Corpus
  The denial of the petition for writ of habeas corpus is affirmed because the appellant failed to state a prima facie case of ineffective assistance of counsel.
• Murphy v. S.W. Puckett
  893 F.2d 94· 5th Cir.· 1990-02-02 ·cited 2×
  The court held that ineffective assistance of counsel, specifically failing to raise a valid double jeopardy defense, is not harmless error if it results in prejudice to the defendant, and that the violation was not cured by a subsequent acquittal on a related charge.
• Barham v. Powell
  895 F.2d 19· 1st Cir.· 1990-01-31 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying the defendant's request for a continuance, and therefore, the defendant was not denied his Sixth Amendment right to self-representation.
• Rondal R. Francis v. R.H. Rison
  894 F.2d 353· 9th Cir.· 1990-01-26 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the government waived the prisoner's procedural default by failing to assert it, and therefore the district court should have reached the merits of the habeas claims.
• Williams-Bey v. Trickey
  894 F.2d 314· 8th Cir.· 1990-01-23 ·cited 2×
  The court held that a state prisoner's claim regarding a state post-conviction court's failure to make findings of fact is not cognizable in a federal habeas corpus petition. The court also held that defense counsel's decision not to cross-examine the victim about a prior alleged
• Wilson v. A.L. Lockhart
  892 F.2d 754· 8th Cir.· 1990-01-03 ·cited 2×·via Habeas Corpus Relief
  The court held that a petitioner's pro se status on a prior habeas petition does not, by itself, warrant relitigation of a claim already decided on the merits.
• Norwood v. Brennan
  891 F.2d 179· 7th Cir.· 1989-12-12 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the 1987 amendment to § 235(b)(3) of the Sentencing Reform Act did not violate the ex post facto clause and properly applied to the petitioner's parole determination.
• Grassia v. Scully
  892 F.2d 16· 2d Cir.· 1989-12-08 ·cited 2×
  The court held that a district court is not required to hear live testimony from all witnesses heard by a magistrate to reject the magistrate's recommendation, provided the district court conducts its own evidentiary hearing and makes a de novo determination.
• C.S. v. Brown
  553 So. 2d 317· Fla. 1st DCA· 1989-12-04 ·cited 2×·via Writ Of Habeas Corpus
  C.S., a juvenile detained for 21 days, challenged his continued detention after the state filed an information charging him as an adult. The court held that a juvenile must be brought before a criminal court judge within 24 hours of an information filing, and that continued deten
• Russell v. Lane
  890 F.2d 947· 7th Cir.· 1989-11-29 ·cited 2×
  A judge's recusal does not automatically invalidate prior rulings, but a party may seek to vacate those rulings under Fed.R.Civ.P. 60(b)(6) if the recusal ground existed at the time of the rulings.
• Arce v. Smith
  889 F.2d 1271· 2d Cir.· 1989-11-20 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the petitioner procedurally defaulted his claims by failing to raise them on direct appeal or in a timely manner, and he failed to show cause to excuse the default, thus precluding review of the merits.
• In the Interest of A.M.R. v. Coler
  555 So. 2d 1248· Fla. 2d DCA· 1989-11-15 ·cited 2×
  A juvenile committed to HRS petitioned for a writ of mandamus to compel HRS to comply with Florida law requiring placement in a commitment program within five days of commitment, rather than remaining in detention indefinitely. The appellate court granted the petition, holding th