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

• United States ex rel. Gordon Jay Thompson v. Parker
  399 F.2d 774· 3d Cir.· 1968-07-12 ·cited 2×
  The district court correctly denied the habeas corpus petition because the military courts gave full and fair consideration to the appellant's constitutional claims regarding the admissibility of his statements.
• van Skike v. Beto
  398 F.2d 407· 5th Cir.· 1968-07-11 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court did not err in refusing to entertain a voluntariness issue for the first time on federal habeas corpus when it was not raised in state court.
• Ashley v. State OF Cal.
  397 F.2d 270· 9th Cir.· 1968-07-09 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the appellant must first seek relief in state courts regarding the potential constitutional issues raised by recent Supreme Court decisions.
• United States ex rel. John Cunningham v. Maroney
  397 F.2d 724· 3d Cir.· 1968-07-05 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the appellant's contentions regarding insufficient evidence and an illegal search did not present a federal question warranting habeas corpus relief.
• Strauss v. Moos
  399 F.2d 1022· 7th Cir.· 1968-06-26 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the parole violation warrant application was sufficiently specific, and thus the denial of the habeas corpus petition was proper.
• Dixon v. Rhay
  396 F.2d 760· 9th Cir.· 1968-06-26 ·cited 2×
  The court held that a successive habeas corpus application may be denied without a hearing if the grounds were previously adjudicated on the merits and the ends of justice would not be served by further inquiry.
• Cloud v. State OF La.
  397 F.2d 252· 5th Cir.· 1968-06-19 ·cited 2×
• Zerschausky v. Beto
  396 F.2d 356· 5th Cir.· 1968-06-12 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the appellant waived his right to present testimony from witnesses indicted as accessories by voluntarily choosing not to call them at trial.
• Holloway v. Dutton
  396 F.2d 127· 5th Cir.· 1968-06-10 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court erred in denying a habeas corpus petition without a hearing, as the petitioner's allegations were sufficient to warrant one.
• Mason v. Hale
  395 F.2d 666· 5th Cir.· 1968-05-29 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court erred in denying an evidentiary hearing on the appellant's habeas corpus petition.
• United States ex rel. William DeBERRY v. Hon. Harold W. Follette
  395 F.2d 686· 2d Cir.· 1968-05-28 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the absence of counsel at arraignment and the failure to provide a second offender warning did not violate federal constitutional rights cognizable on habeas corpus.
• Sutherland v. Louie L. Wainwright
  399 F.2d 303· 5th Cir.· 1968-05-22 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the District Court did not err in denying a writ of habeas corpus without a hearing, as state remedies were not exhausted for one claim and another claim was already decided by state courts.
• Selgado v. Baker
  394 F.2d 831· 10th Cir.· 1968-05-17 ·cited 2×
  The court held that pre-trial publicity and lack of counsel at arraignment did not deprive the appellant of a fair trial, and other claims were not constitutionally cognizable.
• Moskowitz v. Kindt
  394 F.2d 648· 3d Cir.· 1968-05-13 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court correctly dismissed the complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction because the appellant failed to exhaust administrative remedies and there was no basis in fact for his classification.
• Bowlen v. Palmer Scafati
  395 F.2d 692· 1st Cir.· 1968-05-06 ·cited 2×
  The court denied the petitioner's application for a certificate of probable cause for appeal, finding no merit in his claims regarding an unlawful arrest and its alleged fruits.
• Tindol v. Beto
  392 F.2d 582· 5th Cir.· 1968-04-12 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the appellant was deprived of his constitutional rights to a Statement of Facts and assistance of counsel on appeal.
• Fisherman v. Achuff
  392 F.2d 587· 9th Cir.· 1968-04-09 ·cited 2×·via Habeas Corpus Petition
  The dissenting judge believes the majority's suggestions to the district court regarding state relief are unnecessary and potentially exceed constitutional powers.
• Becker v. Beto
  391 F.2d 904· 5th Cir.· 1968-04-08 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the appellant's claims were without merit because the cited Supreme Court decisions were not retroactive and there was no showing of constitutional violation.
• The State OF Tex. v. Whittington
  391 F.2d 905· 5th Cir.· 1968-03-29 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court erred in granting the writ of habeas corpus, as the prisoner was not denied due process or effective assistance of counsel.
• Hollis Morton v. Avery
  393 F.2d 138· 6th Cir.· 1968-03-29 ·cited 2×
  Federal declaratory judgment proceedings cannot be used to attack a state criminal judgment under which a prisoner is confined.
• Johnson v. Louie L. Wainwright
  208 So. 2d 505· Fla. 1st DCA· 1968-03-28 ·cited 2×
  Jim Johnson petitioned for a writ of habeas corpus claiming he was illegally detained and that jail time spent on parole commission warrants should have been credited toward his prison sentence. The court remanded the case, finding that while the parole revocation hearing did not
• Royal v. Dutton
  392 F.2d 544· 5th Cir.· 1968-03-20 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court erred by not ruling on the allegation of coerced perjured testimony and remanded for further proceedings.
• Vigliano v. Honorable John G. Thevos
  390 F.2d 55· 3d Cir.· 1968-01-31 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in abstaining from interfering with a pending state criminal proceeding, despite the plaintiff's claim of federal constitutional rights violations.
• Collins v. State
  387 F.2d 636· 5th Cir.· 1968-01-12 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court erred in denying a habeas corpus petition without a hearing when the petition alleged facts entitling the petitioner to relief, and the state conceded those facts and a factual error by the lower court.
• Rogers v. Kropp
  387 F.2d 374· 6th Cir.· 1968-01-12 ·cited 2×
  A plea to an information waives irregularities in the complaint under Michigan law, and a habeas corpus petition must allege a federal constitutional deprivation.
• Chick v. Wingo
  387 F.2d 330· 6th Cir.· 1967-12-27 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying an evidentiary hearing on the habeas corpus petition, as a full and fair evidentiary hearing had already been conducted in state court.
• Robinson v. Louie L. Wainwright
  387 F.2d 438· 5th Cir.· 1967-12-21 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the petitioner's argument that he should receive credit for time served under a vacated sentence on a subsequent sentence was without merit.
• Waters v. Beto
  387 F.2d 335· 5th Cir.· 1967-12-21 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying the habeas corpus petition, finding the appellant's contentions to be without merit.
• Cleveland Hollingshead v. State
  205 So. 2d 351· Fla. 1st DCA· 1967-12-19 ·cited 2×
  The court held that there was no reversible error in the trial proceedings, and therefore declined to issue the writ of habeas corpus.
• Desrosiers v. State
  204 So. 2d 923· Fla. 1st DCA· 1967-12-14 ·cited 2×·via Habeas Corpus Petition
  The court dismissed the direct appeal for failure to comply with appellate rules but denied the petition for writ of habeas corpus.
• Anastacio Gallegos and Rellis Gallegos v. Turner
  386 F.2d 440· 10th Cir.· 1967-12-01 ·cited 2×
  The court affirmed the trial court's denial of habeas corpus relief, finding no constitutional violation in the denial of appointed counsel for oral argument on appeal.
• Oliver v. Bowens
  386 F.2d 688· 9th Cir.· 1967-11-28 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the searches of the defendant's person and apartment were illegal, as the consent obtained was not voluntary and unequivocal, and thus the writ of habeas corpus was properly granted.
• Carr v. Henderson
  385 F.2d 531· 6th Cir.· 1967-11-22 ·cited 2×·via Federal Habeas Corpus
  The court held that the district court's findings of fact were not clearly erroneous and were supported by substantial evidence, affirming the denial of the habeas corpus petition.
• Lennart A. Benson v. State Bd. OF Parole & Prob.
  384 F.2d 238· 9th Cir.· 1967-10-23 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the appeal is moot because the appellant's sentence has expired, and therefore, the federal courts lack jurisdiction to grant relief. The court also found that the appellant received effective assistance of counsel.
• Hollis Morton v. Henderson
  389 F.2d 699· 6th Cir.· 1967-10-17 ·cited 2×·via Writ Of Habeas Corpus
  The court held that the District Court did not err in denying the petition for a writ of habeas corpus, as the state courts had given full consideration to the petitioner's contentions.
• Walker v. Louie L. Wainwright
  202 So. 2d 850· Fla.· 1967-10-04 ·cited 2×
  Leon Walker sought habeas corpus relief claiming he was denied effective assistance of counsel when his court-appointed appellate attorney was permitted to withdraw and his appeal was dismissed. After the U.S. Supreme Court vacated the Florida Supreme Court's initial denial and r
• Oliver v. Amiotte
  382 F.2d 987· 9th Cir.· 1967-09-19 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court's finding of no waiver of immunity from unreasonable search was not clearly erroneous and adhered to the Ciprés test.
• Taylor v. Page
  381 F.2d 717· 10th Cir.· 1967-09-05 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the habeas corpus petition, as the state court provided a full and fair hearing.
• Reison Gray v. Wingo
  391 F.2d 268· 6th Cir.· 1967-08-22 ·cited 2×
• Weigand v. Wingo
  380 F.2d 1022· 6th Cir.· 1967-07-26 ·cited 2×
  The court held that a petition for rehearing on an appeal from a probation revocation does not constitute exhaustion of state remedies for post-conviction relief.
• Baez v. Feliz Rodriguez
  381 F.2d 35· 10th Cir.· 1967-07-24 ·cited 2×
  The court held that prior procedural defects were waived by the voluntary entry of a guilty plea.
• United States ex rel. Sam de Stefano v. Woods
  382 F.2d 557· 7th Cir.· 1967-07-06 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the federal constitution does not require a jury trial for state criminal contempt cases, and the petitioner's conduct did not warrant a sanity hearing.
• Strowder v. Shovlin
  380 F.2d 370· 3d Cir.· 1967-06-23 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the appellant's arguments regarding his conviction were without merit and that he had not exhausted state remedies for his commitment proceedings.
• Burnside v. State OF Neb.
  378 F.2d 915· 8th Cir.· 1967-06-16 ·cited 2×
  The court held that it lacked authority to restore forfeited good time because the appellant would not be eligible for release even if the time were restored.
• Deluis J. Guillory v. Allgood
  379 F.2d 273· 5th Cir.· 1967-06-15 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the applicant was entitled to a hearing on his habeas corpus petition because he alleged denial of his right to appeal due to lack of a transcript, which is a federal question.
• Pulaski v. Michel A. Skaff
  379 F.2d 538· 7th Cir.· 1967-06-07 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court's finding that confessions were coerced and involuntary, violating petitioner's constitutional rights, was supported by the record.
• McMILLAN v. Parker
  378 F.2d 444· 3d Cir.· 1967-06-06 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the parole statute prohibits crediting time spent on parole towards the original sentence, and the constitutional claim was without merit.
• Burns v. State OF Ala.
  377 F.2d 233· 5th Cir.· 1967-05-19 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the record did not establish as a matter of law that the appellant had failed to exhaust state remedies, as the timing of his appeal notice relative to the ten-day transcript request period was unclear.
• King v. Pinto
  376 F.2d 593· 3d Cir.· 1967-04-20 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the arrest and search were lawful and that the use of physical evidence and voice identification did not violate the Fifth Amendment.
• Case v. Crouse
  376 F.2d 586· 10th Cir.· 1967-04-19 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the prisoner's claims did not warrant an evidentiary hearing and that the allegations, even if true, did not establish a right to release.