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

• Dukes v. A.L. Lockhart
  769 F.2d 504· 8th Cir.· 1985-08-06 ·cited 2×
  The court held that a federal district court must dismiss a state habeas petition containing both exhausted and unexhausted claims, and remanded for reconsideration in light of Rose v. Lundy.
• United States v. Hallahan
  768 F.2d 754· 6th Cir.· 1985-07-29 ·cited 2×·via Writ Of Habeas Corpus
  The court held that it lacks jurisdiction to hear an appeal from an interlocutory order setting forth conditions to purge a contempt order, as the contempt order itself was the final, appealable order.
• Carey v. State OF Minn.
  767 F.2d 440· 8th Cir.· 1985-07-05 ·cited 2×
  A criminal defendant does not have an absolute right to counsel of their choosing, and a defendant who knowingly and intelligently chooses to represent themselves after being informed of their rights waives the benefit of counsel.
• Siegel v. U.S. Parole Comm'n
  613 F. Supp. 127· S.D. Fla.· 1985-06-21 ·cited 2×
  A district court has the inherent power to grant bail in a habeas corpus proceeding brought by a parolee, provided exceptional circumstances are shown.
• Flowers v. Blackburn
  764 F.2d 276· 5th Cir.· 1985-06-18 ·cited 2×·via Habeas Corpus Relief
  The court granted a certificate of probable cause, finding that the petitioner made a substantial showing of the denial of a federal right regarding jury instructions on specific intent.
• Earl v. Israel
  765 F.2d 91· 7th Cir.· 1985-06-11 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the appellant's trial counsel's actions did not constitute ineffective assistance of counsel, as his strategic decisions and perceived misunderstandings of court rulings were reasonable under the circumstances.
• Earnest Lee Wade v. A.L. Lockhart
  763 F.2d 999· 8th Cir.· 1985-06-06 ·cited 2×·via Habeas Corpus Petition
  The court held that the state court's failure to conduct a full and adequate inquiry into Wade's financial status after he raised questions about his ability to afford counsel violated his Fourteenth Amendment right to counsel on appeal.
• Zamora v. Wainwright
  610 F. Supp. 159· S.D. Fla.· 1985-05-30 ·cited 2×
  The court held that claims are exhausted for federal habeas relief if pursuing them in state court would be futile, even if not explicitly ruled upon by state courts.
• Dionisio Gomez and Ana Maria Suarez v. Espinosa
  466 So. 2d 1201· Fla. 3d DCA· 1985-04-09 ·cited 2×
  This case involves a custody dispute between an unmarried father who removed children to Spain and their mother who sought to regain custody in Florida. The appellate court reversed the trial court's vacatur of its own prior orders dismissing the custody petition and granting the
• Karabin v. Petsock
  758 F.2d 966· 3d Cir.· 1985-04-09 ·cited 2×
  Trial counsel's failure to request stenographic recording of opening and closing statements and side bar conferences did not constitute ineffective assistance of counsel because it was not contrary to prevailing professional norms at the time.
• Claudio Fernandez v. Rodriguez
  761 F.2d 558· 10th Cir.· 1985-04-04 ·cited 2×
  The admission of polygraph test results, which are testimonial communications, in a criminal trial cannot be harmless error if the confession was involuntary or if the error was not harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.
• Saccomanno v. Scully
  758 F.2d 62· 2d Cir.· 1985-03-22 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court failed to defer to the state appellate court's implied factual determination that the defendant's disruptive behavior justified his exclusion from the courtroom.
• Mechler v. Procunier
  754 F.2d 1294· 5th Cir.· 1985-03-15 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the introduction of preliminary hearing testimony of an unavailable witness did not violate the defendant's Sixth Amendment right to confrontation, as the state made a good faith effort to secure the witness and the testimony bore sufficient indicia of reliabi
• Triola v. State
  464 So. 2d 1312· Fla. 2d DCA· 1985-03-13 ·cited 2×·via Writ Of Habeas Corpus
  Appellant Triola appealed from a denial of his Rule 3.850 postconviction relief motion challenging his conviction for involuntary sexual battery. The court affirmed, holding that Triola waived his primary argument by failing to raise it on direct appeal and that his ineffective a
• Diamond v. Wyrick
  757 F.2d 192· 8th Cir.· 1985-03-13 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the petitioners failed to exhaust their state remedies for their habeas corpus claims, requiring dismissal of their petitions.
• Holloway v. A.L. Lockhart
  754 F.2d 252· 8th Cir.· 1985-01-31 ·cited 2×
  The court held that a sentence enhancement after a successful appeal does not violate due process if there is no realistic likelihood of vindictiveness, especially when a new judge and prosecutor are involved.
• Carlos v. Wyrick
  753 F.2d 691· 8th Cir.· 1985-01-31 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the admission of testimony from a prosecution witness who refused to identify his accomplice violated the defendant's Sixth Amendment right to confrontation, as the withheld information was not collateral.
• Johns v. The Supreme Court OF Ohio
  753 F.2d 524· 6th Cir.· 1985-01-30 ·cited 2×
  A federal district court lacks jurisdiction to compel a state supreme court to rehear an appeal or to overturn its decision, even if federal constitutional issues are raised.
• United States v. Gleason
  753 F.2d 83· 8th Cir.· 1985-01-23 ·cited 2×·via Habeas Corpus Petition
  The court held that the district court lacked jurisdiction to consider the discovery motion because no case was pending and the motion did not qualify as a § 2255 motion or a § 2241 petition.
• Coleman v. Brown
  753 F.2d 832· 10th Cir.· 1985-01-19 ·cited 2×
  The court granted the application for a stay of execution pending appeal.
• Alfreddie Grant v. Jones
  461 So. 2d 1375· Fla. 4th DCA· 1985-01-16 ·cited 2×·via Writ Of Habeas Corpus
  The court held that a parole violation must be willful to warrant revocation, and the petitioner's failure to immediately report was not willful.
• J.A. Avery, Jr. v. Procunier
  750 F.2d 444· 5th Cir.· 1985-01-14 ·cited 2×·via Habeas Corpus Relief
  The court affirmed the denial of habeas corpus relief, finding no constitutional error in the denial of claims for ineffective assistance of counsel, use of perjured testimony, illegal arrest/search, self-incrimination, or failure to appeal.
• Goudlock v. R.C. Marshall
  751 F.2d 865· 6th Cir.· 1985-01-09 ·cited 2×
  The court held that cross-examining a defendant about their post-Miranda silence regarding an exculpatory explanation, when the police were unaware of the significance of the matter at the time of arrest, does not violate Doyle v. Ohio.
• Basheer Hameed and Abdul Majid v. Jones
  750 F.2d 154· 2d Cir.· 1984-11-26 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the declaration of a mistrial was a proper exercise of discretion and did not violate the constitutional prohibition against double jeopardy.
• United States v. Clark N. Fishel
  747 F.2d 271· 5th Cir.· 1984-11-06 ·cited 2×·via Habeas Corpus Relief
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying the habeas corpus petition without an evidentiary hearing or discovery.
• Cole v. Commanding Officer
  747 F.2d 217· 4th Cir.· 1984-10-25 ·cited 2×
  The dissenting opinion argues that the district court should have exercised jurisdiction to review the conscientious objector discharge application, as administrative remedies were rendered impossible by the Navy's actions.
• Walker v. Weldon
  744 F.2d 775· 11th Cir.· 1984-10-18 ·cited 2×
  A trial court's declaration of a mistrial due to a genuinely deadlocked jury, based on manifest necessity, does not terminate the original jeopardy and does not bar a retrial.
• Foster v. Louie L. Wainwright
  457 So. 2d 1372· Fla.· 1984-10-10 ·cited 2×
  Charles Kenneth Foster, a death row inmate, petitioned for a writ of habeas corpus challenging his 1975 conviction for first-degree murder and robbery and his death sentence. The Florida Supreme Court denied the petition, finding Foster's arguments regarding appellate review, mit
• King v. United States Parole Comm'n
  744 F.2d 1449· 11th Cir.· 1984-10-09 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the United States Parole Commission did not err in revoking King's parole and allowing his Federal Youth Corrections Act sentence to run until its expiration.
• Hutchison v. R.C. Marshall
  744 F.2d 44· 6th Cir.· 1984-09-28 ·cited 2×
  Post-conviction relief is not appropriate for a criminal defendant whose trial was delayed due to media attempts to televise the proceedings, as the delay did not render the trial fundamentally unfair.
• Ellis Bell v. A.L. Lockhart
  741 F.2d 1105· 8th Cir.· 1984-08-27 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the attorney's tactical decision not to move for a directed verdict, based on a reasonable fear of exposing the client to more serious charges, did not constitute ineffective assistance of counsel.
• Alexander v. Johnson
  742 F.2d 117· 4th Cir.· 1984-08-17 ·cited 2×
  The court held that while the North Carolina restitution program for court-appointed counsel fees is facially constitutional, the appellant's claim of unconstitutional application must first be exhausted through state remedies, specifically habeas corpus.
• Dean v. Duckworth
  748 F.2d 367· 7th Cir.· 1984-07-31 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the petitioners' trial counsel did not operate under an actual conflict of interest that adversely affected his performance, and that the other claims for habeas corpus relief were without merit.
• Garner v. Louie L. Wainwright
  454 So. 2d 28· Fla. 1st DCA· 1984-07-24 ·cited 2×·via Writ Of Habeas Corpus
• Jones v. Solem
  739 F.2d 329· 8th Cir.· 1984-07-12 ·cited 2×
  The court held that state court delay in ruling on a post-conviction motion, even when combined with potential parole eligibility before appeal resolution, does not constitute exceptional circumstances to excuse the federal habeas corpus exhaustion requirement.
• Thomas v. Auger
  738 F.2d 936· 8th Cir.· 1984-07-11 ·cited 2×
  A state prisoner is barred from federal habeas review of a constitutional claim if the claim was procedurally defaulted in state court, absent a showing of cause and prejudice for the default.
• Hollis G. Byrd v. McKASKLE
  733 F.2d 1133· 5th Cir.· 1984-06-08 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the appellant's claims of prosecutorial vindictiveness, due process violation regarding prior conviction evidence, and improper testimony by former jurors lacked merit or were not properly preserved for appeal.
• Dankert v. Wharton
  733 F.2d 1537· 11th Cir.· 1984-06-08 ·cited 2×
  A defendant does not have a constitutional right to appointed counsel for discretionary post-conviction proceedings, such as a motion to withdraw a guilty plea after sentencing.
• Kennick v. Superior Court OF the State OF Cal.
  736 F.2d 1277· 9th Cir.· 1984-06-05 ·cited 2×
  The court held that requiring a probationer to re-serve time already served on probation violates the Double Jeopardy Clause, but the custodial portion of probation not yet served can still be imposed.
• Romano v. Black
  735 F.2d 319· 8th Cir.· 1984-05-31 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the sentencing judge denied Romano due process by failing to consider alternatives to incarceration when revoking his probation.
• Nealy J. Buchanon v. Mintzes
  734 F.2d 274· 6th Cir.· 1984-05-09 ·cited 2×
  The court held that Rule 9(a) of habeas corpus proceedings requires a showing of actual prejudice to bar consideration of claims, and that the state failed to show prejudice regarding the petitioner's claims of unknowing waiver of counsel and guilty plea.
• Zeigler v. State OF Ala.
  731 F.2d 737· 11th Cir.· 1984-05-03 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals' decision that Talwin was a controlled substance in 1974 was binding, and not precluded by a prior ruling that the 1973 classification was invalid.
• Flowers v. Wyrick
  732 F.2d 659· 8th Cir.· 1984-04-25 ·cited 2×·via Federal Habeas Corpus
  The court affirmed the denial of federal habeas corpus relief, holding that the petitioner's guilty plea was voluntary and knowing, and that jurisdictional and coercion claims were waived or unsupported.
• Bruce v. The Fla. Parole & Prob. Comm'n & Louie L. Wainwright as Sec'y
  450 So. 2d 520· Fla. 3d DCA· 1984-04-03 ·cited 2×·via Habeas Corpus Petition
  Robert Bruce sought habeas corpus relief challenging the Florida Parole and Probation Commission's refusal to convert his presumptive parole release date into an effective parole release date. The court held that the Commission abused its discretion by refusing to set an effectiv
• Griffin v. Wainwright
  588 F. Supp. 1549· M.D. Fla.· 1984-03-21 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the petitioner's claims of ineffective assistance of counsel were without merit, and therefore denied the petition for a writ of habeas corpus and the application for a stay of execution.
• Sundel v. Justices OF the Superior Court OF the State OF R.I.
  728 F.2d 40· 1st Cir.· 1984-02-29 ·cited 2×
  A defendant's request for a mistrial, made after the judge removes their counsel, will be taken at face value, and a subsequent retrial will not violate the Double Jeopardy Clause unless the judge's removal of counsel was motivated by bad faith or harassment.
• Sanders v. Fair
  728 F.2d 557· 1st Cir.· 1984-02-29 ·cited 2×
  A state court's decision to apply a new rule of state law prospectively, rather than retroactively, does not violate the federal Constitution, even if the new rule would have benefited the defendant in his prior trial.
• Bryon Curtis Doster v. Mims
  444 So. 2d 1153· Fla. 2d DCA· 1984-02-10 ·cited 2×
• Narcisse v. Maggio
  725 F.2d 969· 5th Cir.· 1984-02-06 ·cited 2×·via Federal Habeas Corpus
  The court granted the application for a certificate of probable cause and stay of execution, remanding the case for an evidentiary hearing on claims of ineffective assistance of counsel.
• Antone v. Louie L. Wainwright
  444 So. 2d 959· Fla.· 1984-01-20 ·cited 2×·via Writ Of Habeas Corpus
  Anthony Antone, convicted of first-degree murder and sentenced to death, petitioned for habeas corpus relief, appealed the trial court's denial of post-conviction relief under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850, and sought a stay of execution. The Florida Supreme Court deni