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

• Buford v. Dugger
  841 F.2d 1057· 11th Cir.· 1988-03-18 ·cited 2×·via Federal Habeas Corpus
  The court held that the petitioner's claim regarding jury instructions was procedurally barred because it was not raised on direct appeal, and even if considered on the merits, it would fail.
• Fletcher Thomas Mann v. Lynaugh
  840 F.2d 1194· 5th Cir.· 1988-03-15 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the appellant's notice of appeal was untimely filed, and therefore, the court lacks jurisdiction to hear the appeal.
• Darden v. State
  521 So. 2d 1103· Fla.· 1988-03-14 ·cited 2×·via Writ Of Habeas Corpus
  Willie Darden, a death row inmate with seven execution warrants signed, petitioned the Florida Supreme Court for habeas corpus relief and a stay of execution scheduled for March 15, 1988. The Court denied all relief, finding most claims procedurally barred because they should hav
• Tyndall v. Gunter
  840 F.2d 617· 8th Cir.· 1988-03-03 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the Nebraska state court retained jurisdiction over pending criminal matters despite the retrocession of jurisdiction to the federal government, and thus the habeas corpus application was properly denied.
• Sellers v. Morris
  840 F.2d 352· 6th Cir.· 1988-02-26 ·cited 2×
• Ganzel v. Ganzel
  520 So. 2d 112· Fla. 1st DCA· 1988-02-22 ·cited 2×·via Writ Of Habeas Corpus
  The court held that a contempt order for failure to pay child support must include an affirmative finding that the contemnor has the present ability to comply with the purge conditions.
• Bradford Lee Cooley v. A.L. Lockhart
  839 F.2d 431· 8th Cir.· 1988-02-19 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the victim's in-court identification was reliable despite a suggestive showup, and other claimed trial errors did not violate due process.
• Winfrey v. Wyrick
  836 F.2d 406· 8th Cir.· 1988-02-17 ·cited 2×
  A confession is voluntary if obtained in a manner compatible with constitutional requirements, considering the totality of the circumstances, even if the defendant has diminished mental capacity, as long as there is no evidence of state coercion.
• Jones v. Butler
  837 F.2d 691· 5th Cir.· 1988-02-17 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the petitioner was not denied effective assistance of counsel because his trial counsel's decision not to call two psychiatrists as witnesses was a rational, well-reasoned strategic decision that did not fall below the Strickland standard.
• Dupuy v. Butler
  837 F.2d 699· 5th Cir.· 1988-02-17 ·cited 2×
  A state prisoner's habeas corpus claim under Hicks v. Oklahoma requires showing either that the sentencing decision was not made by the proper authority or that the authority lacked knowledge of sentencing discretion, and that prejudice resulted; here, the sentence was within the
• Zenous Whaley v. Rodriguez
  840 F.2d 1046· 2d Cir.· 1988-02-10 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the defendant's counsel was not ineffective for failing to file a speedy trial motion because such a motion would have been denied, as the People exercised due diligence in apprehending the defendant.
• Liberta v. Kelly
  839 F.2d 77· 2d Cir.· 1988-02-09 ·cited 2×
  The court affirms the denial of the petitioner's writ of habeas corpus.
• Moeller v. The Attorney Gen. OF the State OF S.D. & Jerry Parkinson
  838 F.2d 309· 8th Cir.· 1988-02-05 ·cited 2×·via Habeas Corpus Review
  The court held that sufficient evidence existed for a rational jury to find the petitioner guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, rejecting his entrapment defense.
• Smith v. Chrans
  836 F.2d 1076· 7th Cir.· 1988-02-01 ·cited 2×
  A district court's attempt to limit a certificate of probable cause to specific issues does not affect the appellate court's disposition of the petitioner's appeal.
• Sims v. Dugger
  519 So. 2d 1080· Fla. 1st DCA· 1988-01-29 ·cited 2×
  William Sims appeals the denial of his habeas corpus petition challenging a prison disciplinary conviction for starting a fire in his cell. The First District Court of Appeal reversed, holding that Sims stated sufficient facts to require the trial court to issue a show cause orde
• Gillespie v. Ryan
  837 F.2d 628· 3d Cir.· 1988-01-29 ·cited 2×
  Sentencing a defendant for both felony murder and the underlying felony in a single trial does not violate the Double Jeopardy Clause of the federal constitution.
• Alexander v. Foltz
  838 F.2d 140· 6th Cir.· 1988-01-26 ·cited 2×
  The court held that erroneous jury instructions regarding the presumption of intent and implied malice were not harmless beyond a reasonable doubt, entitling the petitioner to a new trial.
• Sterling Williams v. A.L. Lockhart
  837 F.2d 324· 8th Cir.· 1988-01-19 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court correctly dismissed the habeas corpus application because the appellant's guilty pleas were voluntary and his sentences did not violate the double jeopardy clause.
• Cuadra v. Sullivan
  837 F.2d 56· 2d Cir.· 1988-01-12 ·cited 2×
  The district court erred in summarily dismissing a habeas corpus petition on the merits without requiring a response from the state, as the petition contained arguable constitutional claims that were not frivolous.
• Robinson v. A.L. Lockhart
  835 F.2d 1271· 8th Cir.· 1988-01-06 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying the habeas corpus petition because the guilty pleas were voluntary and counsel was effective.
• Subias v. Meese
  835 F.2d 1288· 9th Cir.· 1987-12-31 ·cited 2×
  Federal courts lack jurisdiction to review a habeas corpus petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 when the petitioner's custodian is outside the court's jurisdiction and their whereabouts are unknown.
• Gray v. United States
  834 F.2d 967· 11th Cir.· 1987-12-28 ·cited 2×
  The denial of a habeas corpus petition must be vacated and remanded for reconsideration of the claim that counsel was ineffective for failing to file an appeal after being specifically requested to do so.
• Metheny v. M.C. Hamby
  835 F.2d 672· 6th Cir.· 1987-12-22 ·cited 2×
  A claimed violation of Article IV(e) of the Interstate Agreement on Detainers (IAD) is not a fundamental defect cognizable under 28 U.S.C. § 2254, absent exceptional circumstances.
• Bundy v. Dugger
  675 F. Supp. 622· M.D. Fla.· 1987-12-22 ·cited 2×·via Habeas Corpus Petition
  The court held that the petitioner was competent to stand trial, finding that the evidence did not support a diagnosis of bipolar mood disorder or demonstrate incompetence.
• Jeffers v. Leeke
  835 F.2d 522· 4th Cir.· 1987-12-15 ·cited 2×
  The court held that while comments on a defendant's post-arrest silence may violate Doyle v. Ohio, such errors are harmless if the defendant consistently maintained an accident defense, and there is no reasonable probability that the outcome would have differed absent the comment
• Erling Knud Ove Hansen, Jr. v. A.M. "Tony" Fontana
  517 So. 2d 714· Fla. 1st DCA· 1987-12-10 ·cited 2×
  Hansen appealed the denial of his habeas corpus petition challenging his 1983 parole revocation. The court affirmed the denial of most grounds but reversed the dismissal of constitutional challenges to the parole revocation statutes and the parole commission's authority, finding
• McCANDLESS v. Beyer
  835 F.2d 58· 3d Cir.· 1987-12-08 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the permissive presumption statute N.J.S.A. 2C:39-2b, which allows a jury to presume the absence of a carrying permit from possession of a firearm, does not violate due process because there is a rational connection between the basic and ultimate facts presume
• Harris v. Martin
  834 F.2d 361· 3d Cir.· 1987-11-30 ·cited 2×
  The dissent argues that the majority's interpretation of Rule 60(b)(5) is too narrow and that the Parole Commission should be granted relief from the prior judgment.
• Wilson v. Foti
  832 F.2d 891· 5th Cir.· 1987-11-25 ·cited 2×
  A state prisoner challenging the fact or length of confinement must exhaust state remedies, including discretionary review by the state supreme court, before filing a federal habeas corpus petition.
• Larson v. United States
  833 F.2d 758· 8th Cir.· 1987-11-25 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the appellant's claims of illegal seizure, ineffective assistance of counsel, and improper presentence report information did not entitle him to habeas corpus relief.
• Wesselman v. Seabold
  834 F.2d 99· 6th Cir.· 1987-11-20 ·cited 2×
  The Sixth Circuit held that the district court properly denied the habeas petition because the state court's decision rested on an independent and adequate state procedural ground, and the appellant failed to demonstrate cause for his procedural default.
• Brecheisen v. Eloy Mondragon
  833 F.2d 238· 10th Cir.· 1987-11-12 ·cited 2×
  The court held that a conviction for criminal sexual penetration (CSP) did not violate the Double Jeopardy Clause, the CSP statute was not unconstitutionally vague or overbroad, and there was sufficient evidence to support the conviction.
• Fugitt v. D.G. Lemacks (Sheriff)
  833 F.2d 251· 11th Cir.· 1987-11-12 ·cited 2×·via Writ Of Habeas Corpus
  The Double Jeopardy Clause does not bar retrial when prosecutorial misconduct was not intended to subvert the protections of the Clause.
• Jones v. Dugger
  518 So. 2d 295· Fla. 2d DCA· 1987-11-06 ·cited 2×
  Sheldon Jones petitioned for habeas corpus relief claiming ineffective assistance of appellate counsel who advised him to dismiss his attempted murder appeal in exchange for the state not pursuing a first-degree murder charge after the victim died. The Florida District Court of A
• Holland v. The Dist. Court
  831 F.2d 940· 10th Cir.· 1987-10-26 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the 1982 amendment to Colorado's statute of limitations for certain offenses involving child victims was intended to apply to prosecutions not already time-barred at the time of its enactment, and its application did not violate the ex post facto clause.
• Hall v. State
  678 F. Supp. 858· M.D. Fla.· 1987-10-23 ·cited 2×
  The Court held that the Interstate Agreement on Detainers Act (IADA) encompasses sentencing, obligating the State of Florida to sentence the Petitioner within the statutory timeframe.
• Vogel v. Judge John G. Ferris & the Seventeenth Jud. Cir. Court of Broward Cnty.
  513 So. 2d 1100· Fla. 4th DCA· 1987-10-14 ·cited 2×·via Writ Of Habeas Corpus
• Major Melvin Johnson v. R.M. Muncy
  830 F.2d 508· 4th Cir.· 1987-09-22 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the Virginia Supreme Court's shift in procedural rules regarding habeas corpus review, as established in Slayton v. Parrigan, does not bar the petitioner from seeking federal habeas corpus relief in this case. However, the case is remanded for a harmless error
• Dremann v. Francis
  828 F.2d 6· 9th Cir.· 1987-09-18 ·cited 2×
  A state court sentence originally requiring only a fine, even if the individual refuses to pay and faces potential incarceration, does not meet the 'in custody' requirement for federal habeas corpus relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2254.
• Haynes v. Hoyt C. Cupp
  827 F.2d 435· 9th Cir.· 1987-09-02 ·cited 2×
  The court affirmed the denial of habeas corpus, finding no double jeopardy violation, breach of plea agreement, or prosecutorial misconduct.
• United States v. Craig
  827 F.2d 393· 8th Cir.· 1987-09-02 ·cited 2×·via Habeas Corpus Petition
  The court held that a petitioner represented by counsel who fails to raise a Rule 32(c)(3)(D) issue in prior available appeals cannot seek habeas relief unless the failure was due to ineffective assistance of counsel.
• United States v. Peloso
  824 F.2d 914· 11th Cir.· 1987-08-14 ·cited 2×·via Habeas Corpus Petition
  The court held that a motion to correct a presentence investigation report under Fed.R.Crim.P. 32 does not confer jurisdiction on the district court after sentencing, especially when the defendant failed to object to the report at trial.
• Mobley v. Dugger
  823 F.2d 1495· 11th Cir.· 1987-08-07 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the seven-year delay in incarcerating the defendant did not violate due process because the defendant contributed to the delay by failing to surrender as required by his supersedeas bond.
• Wiggins v. A.L. Lockhart
  825 F.2d 1237· 8th Cir.· 1987-07-31 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the appellant failed to allege sufficient facts to establish a constitutional claim of an equal protection violation regarding his parole classification.
• Gilmore v. Henderson
  825 F.2d 663· 2d Cir.· 1987-07-31 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the trial court's exclusion of defense witnesses' testimony, which impeded the defendant's constitutional right to present a defense, was not harmless error beyond a reasonable doubt.
• Jere Maudsley v. Navarro
  510 So. 2d 1079· Fla. 4th DCA· 1987-07-30 ·cited 2×
  A resident alien held in custody under a ne exeat writ for non-compliance with spousal support orders challenges the writ's validity and the $400,000 bond amount through a habeas corpus petition. The court denies the petition, holding that procedural defects in the writ cannot be
• Holsclaw v. Smith
  822 F.2d 1041· 11th Cir.· 1987-07-29 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the petitioner's trial counsel's failure to challenge the sufficiency of the evidence constituted ineffective assistance of counsel, entitling him to relief.
• Breeze v. Trickey
  824 F.2d 653· 8th Cir.· 1987-07-27 ·cited 2×
  The court held that challenging an Indiana sentence in Missouri courts does not satisfy the exhaustion of state remedies requirement for federal habeas corpus petitions.
• Waldo E. Granberry v. Thieret
  823 F.2d 1212· 7th Cir.· 1987-07-20 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the petitioner's ex post facto claim was not colorable and affirmed the denial of his habeas corpus petition, declining to require further exhaustion of state remedies.
• Bailey v. Southerland
  821 F.2d 277· 5th Cir.· 1987-07-13 ·cited 2×
  The appeal is dismissed as moot because the prisoner has been released and his subsequent re-incarceration renders his claims regarding good time and expungement moot.