Habeas Corpus

18,780 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count

• Lloyd v. Loeffler
  694 F.2d 489· 7th Cir.· 1982-11-30 ·cited 46×
  The court held that a tort suit for interference with child custody is not barred by the domestic relations exception to diversity jurisdiction, and Wisconsin law recognizes such a tort.
• Sullivan v. State OF Ala.
  666 F.2d 478· 11th Cir.· 1982-01-22 ·cited 46×
  The court held that the admission of pre-Miranda statements was constitutional as they were voluntary, and post-Miranda statements were admissible due to a valid waiver, and prosecutorial comment on silence was harmless error.
• Hopkins v. Jarvis
  648 F.2d 981· 5th Cir.· 1981-06-23 ·cited 46×
  The court held that the appellant received adequate notice that he was subject to criminal contempt proceedings, thus affirming the denial of his habeas corpus petition.
• Tyler v. Phelps
  643 F.2d 1095· 5th Cir.· 1981-04-27 ·cited 46×
  The court held that while the jury charge on presumptions was unconstitutional, federal habeas relief was barred by procedural default due to the failure to object at trial, absent a showing of cause.
• Sweet v. Hoyt C. Cupp
  640 F.2d 233· 9th Cir.· 1981-02-19 ·cited 46×
  The court has jurisdiction and the appeal should be affirmed on the merits.
• Wilks v. Israel
  627 F.2d 32· 7th Cir.· 1980-07-22 ·cited 46×
  The court held that the petitioner knowingly and intelligently waived his right to counsel and that the trial judge's refusal to recuse himself did not deprive the petitioner of a fair trial. The court also held that the petitioner failed to exhaust his state remedies on the issu
• Grooms v. Louie L. Wainwright
  610 F.2d 344· 5th Cir.· 1980-01-25 ·cited 46×
  The court held that the state did not violate appellant's right against double jeopardy by retrying him after a mistrial, nor was he denied due process due to a juror's alleged remark, as the trial judge acted within his discretion.
• Moran v. Estelle
  607 F.2d 1140· 5th Cir.· 1979-12-07 ·cited 46×
  The court held that a state court's adjudication of a constitutional claim on its merits, despite a procedural default, allows federal habeas review, and that a simple minute entry is insufficient to prove a knowing and intelligent waiver of counsel.
• Tules v. Zapata
  588 F.2d 1017· 5th Cir.· 1979-02-02 ·cited 46×
  The court held that the combined testimony of two doctors raised a substantial doubt about the petitioner's competency to stand trial, requiring a remand for an evidentiary hearing.
• Willeford v. Estelle
  538 F.2d 1194· 5th Cir.· 1976-09-20 ·cited 46×
  The court held that the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals' reformation of a sentence, even if erroneous under state law, is a matter of state law and not a federal constitutional issue cognizable on federal habeas corpus.
• Sharin Potvin v. Keller
  313 So. 2d 703· Fla.· 1975-04-30 ·cited 46×
  The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the dismissal of a habeas corpus petition filed by parents challenging a juvenile court's adjudication of their daughter as a dependent child, holding that the federal constitution does not require appointment of counsel in juvenile dependency p
• Blackburn v. Armond Cross
  510 F.2d 1014· 5th Cir.· 1975-04-02 ·cited 46×
  The court held that the Wingate principle, which prohibits the state from relitigating any issue determined in a prior prosecution, should be applied retroactively to cases that became final before Wingate was decided.
• Castillo v. Estelle
  504 F.2d 1243· 5th Cir.· 1974-12-09 ·cited 46×
  An attorney's simultaneous representation of a criminal defendant and a principal prosecution witness in unrelated litigation constitutes a conflict of interest that, as a matter of law, deprives the defendant of effective assistance of counsel.
• Anglin v. Johnston
  504 F.2d 1165· 7th Cir.· 1974-11-01 ·cited 46×
  A prisoner serving a federal criminal sentence is not entitled to credit for time spent in custody for civil contempt, unless the sentencing judge expressly makes the contempt confinement concurrent with the prior criminal sentence.
• Wilwording v. Swenson
  502 F.2d 844· 8th Cir.· 1974-09-10 ·cited 46×
  The court held that the petitioner's claim of punishment without any evidence is cognizable in habeas corpus and not barred by res judicata, collateral estoppel, controlling weight, or waiver, and is not foreclosed by the nonretroactivity of Wolff v. McDonnell.
• Ralph v. Warden, Maryland Penitentiary
  438 F.2d 786· 4th Cir.· 1970-12-11 ·cited 46×
  The court held that the imposition of the death penalty for rape, where the victim's life was not taken or endangered, violates the Eighth Amendment's prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment.
• Baker v. Louie L. Wainwright
  422 F.2d 145· 5th Cir.· 1970-02-13 ·cited 46×
  The court held that joint representation by a single attorney for co-defendants in a joint trial, where evidence implicating one defendant from the other's confession is introduced, creates a conflict of interest that denies effective assistance of counsel, even if the confessing
• United States ex rel. Kahmid Solomon v. Mancusi
  412 F.2d 88· 2d Cir.· 1969-05-05 ·cited 46×
  The court held that the defendant was not denied his Sixth Amendment rights to a speedy trial or assistance of counsel, as the delay was not unduly long, prejudicial, or purposeful/oppressive.
• Huey R. LEE v. State OF Ala.
  406 F.2d 466· 5th Cir.· 1968-11-22 ·cited 46×
• Hash v. Henderson
  385 F.2d 475· 8th Cir.· 1967-11-27 ·cited 46×
  The court held that time spent in state prison after being paroled from federal custody and subsequently arrested as a state parole violator does not count towards the federal sentence unless federal parole is revoked and the state prison is redesignated for federal confinement.
• Shelton v. United States Bd. OF Parole
  388 F.2d 567· D.C. Cir.· 1967-11-01 ·cited 46×
  The court held that the Parole Board retains jurisdiction to execute a violator warrant even if it defers action pending completion of criminal proceedings, but unreasonable delay in holding a revocation hearing for non-criminal violations can prejudice the parolee and warrant in
• Cameron v. Mullen
  387 F.2d 193· D.C. Cir.· 1967-03-02 ·cited 46×
  The Court of General Sessions lacked jurisdiction to commit a person under D.C. Code § 24-301(a) after a verdict of not guilty by reason of insanity.
• Stevens v. Marks
  383 U.S. 234· U.S.· 1966-02-28 ·cited 46×
  A state cannot hold a witness in contempt for refusing to answer potentially incriminating questions if the witness was misled into believing no immunity was available, even if a valid immunity statute existed.
• Root v. Cunningham
  344 F.2d 1· 4th Cir.· 1965-03-26 ·cited 46×
  The court held that the appellant's absence from the jury instruction conference did not violate his constitutional rights, and his claims of ineffective counsel and lack of counsel at arraignment were factually unsupported.
• United States ex rel. George Angelet v. Honorable Edward M. FAY
  333 F.2d 12· 2d Cir.· 1964-06-11 ·cited 46×
  The dissenting judge argues that the Mapp v. Ohio decision, establishing the exclusionary rule for illegally seized evidence, should apply retroactively to convictions predating the decision, as it declares a fundamental constitutional right.
• Hall v. Warden, Maryland Penitentiary
  313 F.2d 483· 4th Cir.· 1963-01-17 ·cited 46×
• Roberts v. Pegelow
  313 F.2d 548· 4th Cir.· 1963-01-15 ·cited 46×
  The court held that while some allegations might warrant inquiry, new policies adopted by the District of Columbia regarding the treatment of Muslim inmates rendered the petitioners' claims moot.
• United States ex rel. Anthony Scoleri v. Banmiller
  310 F.2d 720· 3d Cir.· 1962-10-10 ·cited 46×
• Simmons v. United States
  253 F.2d 909· 8th Cir.· 1958-04-18 ·cited 46×
  A federal prisoner must exhaust remedies under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 in the sentencing court before seeking habeas corpus relief, even for issues of mental competency at the time of trial, unless a specific certification under 18 U.S.C.A. § 4245 has been filed.
• United States ex rel. Joseph Marcial v. FAY
  247 F.2d 662· 2d Cir.· 1957-08-16 ·cited 46×
  Federal courts should not intervene in state criminal proceedings unless there's a clear showing of fundamental unfairness or injustice, even if the defendant lacked counsel.
• United States ex rel. Berman v. Craig
  207 F.2d 888· 3d Cir.· 1953-11-27 ·cited 46×
  The court held that the local board's failure to consider the registrant's change in status and its premature issuance of an induction order violated his procedural rights under Selective Service Regulations.
• Farish v. Smoot
  58 So.2d 534· Fla.· 1952-03-28 ·cited 46×
  The Supreme Court of Florida affirmed a judgment against a municipal judge who ordered the rearrest of a plaintiff after the plaintiff had been released on a writ of habeas corpus. The court held that the judge, despite being informed of the habeas corpus proceedings, willfully f
• Ex parte Farrell
  189 F.2d 540· 1st Cir.· 1951-06-08 ·cited 46×
  The court held that an application for a certificate of probable cause, made after the statutory time limit for appeal has expired, cannot confer jurisdiction on the appellate court.
• Smith v. United States
  187 F.2d 192· D.C. Cir.· 1950-12-07 ·cited 46×
  A motion to vacate a conviction under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 is not available for errors that could have been raised on direct appeal, such as the admission of evidence obtained through illegal detention or identification procedures, absent specific circumstances like lack of counsel o
• Hiatt v. Compagna
  178 F.2d 42· 5th Cir.· 1949-11-10 ·cited 46×
• Miller v. United States
  147 F.2d 372· 2d Cir.· 1945-02-20 ·cited 46×
  The court held that when consecutive sentences are imposed for a single offense, one sentence must be vacated, and the other must stand, as there can only be one valid sentence.
• Smith v. Brown
  135 Fla. 830· Fla.· 1939-01-14 ·cited 46×
  In this habeas corpus proceeding, the Florida Supreme Court held that a trial court may vacate and revoke a criminal sentence after the defendant has begun serving it when the action is taken at the defendant's request or instance, even if a new and harsher sentence is imposed at
• Nelson v. M. P. Lehman Sheriff of Dade Cnty.
  100 Fla. 799· Fla.· 1930-09-11 ·cited 46×
  Nelson Dubbs challenges his arrest and prosecution for grand larceny on habeas corpus, arguing the statute of limitations had expired. The Florida Supreme Court reverses, holding that the warrant was not properly "issued" until it was placed in the sheriff's hands in June 1930, m
• Quince v. Crosby
  360 F.3d 1259· 11th Cir.· 2004-02-18 ·cited 45×
  The Eleventh Circuit affirmed the district court's denial of habeas relief, holding that a claim challenging a state judge's recusal in a collateral proceeding is not cognizable on federal habeas review. The court also found no ineffective assistance of counsel based on the trial
• Puleio v. Vose
  830 F.2d 1197· 1st Cir.· 1987-10-09 ·cited 45×
  The court held that the appellant's claims were procedurally barred or lacked constitutional merit, affirming the district court's dismissal of the habeas corpus petition.
• Johnson v. Louie L. Wainwright
  806 F.2d 1479· 11th Cir.· 1986-12-08 ·cited 45×
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying the petition for a writ of habeas corpus, affirming the petitioner's conviction and death sentence.
• Elwood C. Barclay v. Louie L
  444 So. 2d 956· Fla.· 1984-01-19 ·cited 45×
  Barclay sought habeas corpus relief from his death sentence for first-degree murder, arguing his appellate counsel had a conflict of interest by simultaneously representing both him and his co-defendant Dougan, and that counsel provided ineffective assistance. The Florida Supreme
• Niziolek v. Ashe
  694 F.2d 282· 1st Cir.· 1982-11-24 ·cited 45×
  The court held that the Rose v. Lundy 'total exhaustion' rule does not require a federal appellate court to decline review of a district court decision on the merits of exhausted claims in a mixed petition when the district court opinion issued before Rose or so close in time as
• Johnson Kenneth Evans v. Janing
  489 F.2d 470· 8th Cir.· 1973-12-28 ·cited 45×
  The court held that the failure to disclose a police report detailing an initial failure to identify the defendant from photographs did not deprive the defendant of due process, as the evidence was not sufficiently material to create a reasonable doubt.
• Walker v. Caldwell
  476 F.2d 213· 5th Cir.· 1973-04-03 ·cited 45×
  Appointed counsel was ineffective because the attorney did not familiarize himself with the facts and petitioner pleaded guilty to felonies that were actually misdemeanors.
• Doughty v. Beto
  396 F.2d 128· 5th Cir.· 1968-06-19 ·cited 45×
  A chronic alcoholic's imprisonment for theft by false pretenses does not constitute cruel and unusual punishment, and court-appointed counsel's assistance was effective.
• Johnston v. Honorable Rabe F. Marsh
  227 F.2d 528· 3d Cir.· 1955-11-30 ·cited 45×
  The court held that the district judge acted within his jurisdiction in admitting a state prisoner to bail pending a habeas corpus hearing.
• United States ex rel. Smith v. Baldi
  192 F.2d 540· 3d Cir.· 1951-10-20 ·cited 45×
  The court held that the district court erred in declining to pass on the merits of the habeas corpus petition, but ultimately affirmed the denial of the writ as no federal constitutional violation was found.
• State v. Quigg
  91 Fla. 197· Fla.· 1926-01-23 ·cited 45×
  The Florida Supreme Court holds that a fugitive held under an executive warrant of extradition is not entitled to bail, either before or after the warrant issues, because extradition proceedings are sui generis and governed exclusively by federal constitutional and statutory prov
• State v. Horne
  52 Fla. 125· Fla.· 1906-06-01 ·cited 45×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that a conditional pardon remains enforceable even after the specific time period mentioned in the original sentence expires, and that violation of pardon conditions at any time renders the pardon void and subjects the parolee to re-imprisonment for