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

• Fisher v. Hargett
  997 F.2d 1095· 5th Cir.· 1993-07-26
  The state is not constitutionally required to provide an indigent defendant with a free transcript of a prior trial on a different charge if the value of the transcript is minimal and adequate alternatives exist.
• Kermit Smith, Jr. v. Dixon
  996 F.2d 667· 4th Cir.· 1993-07-23
• Patterson v. von Riesen
  999 F.2d 1235· 8th Cir.· 1993-07-23
  Prosecutors, parole board members, and prison wardens are absolutely immune from damages for actions taken within the scope of their official duties, including prosecutorial decisions, parole determinations, and incarceration pursuant to valid court orders.
• Wright v. Dallman
  999 F.2d 174· 6th Cir.· 1993-07-20
  The Sixth Amendment right to confront witnesses does not require a trial court to allow cross-examination on speculative inferences of bias, especially when other evidence supports the conviction and the limitation does not render the trial fundamentally unfair.
• Overstreet v. Caspari
  998 F.2d 636· 8th Cir.· 1993-07-20 ·via Federal Habeas Corpus
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing the second habeas petition as an abuse of the writ because the petitioner failed to show cause and prejudice for raising new claims.
• Williams v. Whitley
  994 F.2d 226· 5th Cir.· 1993-07-20
• Bonin v. Vasquez
  999 F.2d 425· 9th Cir.· 1993-07-16
  The court held that there is no constitutional right to effective counsel in state post-conviction or federal habeas corpus proceedings, and therefore, the Public Defender's potential ineffectiveness does not constitute cause to excuse the late filing of claims.
• Smith v. Groose
  998 F.2d 1439· 8th Cir.· 1993-07-16
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying the habeas petition because the claims were procedurally barred and the underlying issues lacked merit.
• Noble Lee Simpson v. Ortiz
  995 F.2d 606· 5th Cir.· 1993-07-16
  The court held that the Parole Commission's application of its 1990 guidelines did not violate the ex post facto clause and that the Commission did not violate the separation of powers doctrine by establishing parole suitability guidelines.
• Williams v. Dugger
  827 F. Supp. 1568· S.D. Fla.· 1993-07-15
  The court held that a judge's brief, cordial remark to a victim witness does not violate due process, and that convictions for robbery, assault, and burglary arising from a single incident do not violate the Double Jeopardy Clause if the legislature intended separate punishments
• Lambert N. DePOMPEI v. Ohio Adult Parole Auth.
  999 F.2d 138· 6th Cir.· 1993-07-14
  The court held that a habeas corpus petition's jurisdiction, once attached, is not defeated by the petitioner's release from custody, and potential collateral consequences can prevent a petition from being moot.
• Quinn v. Neal
  998 F.2d 526· 7th Cir.· 1993-07-13
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in limiting cross-examination regarding abuse petitions and the defendant's ongoing relationship with the witness, as no sufficient nexus was shown to demonstrate bias or motive to lie.
• Childs v. Collins
  995 F.2d 67· 5th Cir.· 1993-07-13 ·via Habeas Corpus Relief
  The court held that a defendant who is informed of his right to appeal and fails to make his desire to appeal known waives that right, and thus cannot claim ineffective assistance of counsel for failure to appeal.
• United States v. Casel
  995 F.2d 1299· 5th Cir.· 1993-07-13
  The court affirmed the convictions and sentences of the appealing defendants, finding sufficient evidence and no reversible error in the proceedings. Ineffective assistance of counsel claims were dismissed without prejudice.
• United States v. Wagner
  999 F.2d 312· 8th Cir.· 1993-07-09 ·via Habeas Corpus Petition
  The court held that 18 U.S.C. § 3583(a) provided authority for imposing supervised release for a conspiracy that extended beyond the statute's effective date, and that supervised release could be reimposed after revocation.
• Fetterly v. Paskett
  997 F.2d 1295· 9th Cir.· 1993-07-09
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion in denying a stay of proceedings to allow the petitioner to amend his habeas corpus petition with newly exhausted claims, particularly those related to alleged sentencing errors under state law.
• Powell v. Ducharme
  998 F.2d 710· 9th Cir.· 1993-07-09
  The new parole scheme, by postponing a prisoner's parole hearing, worsens conditions and violates the Ex Post Facto Clause.
• Miller v. Rowland
  999 F.2d 389· 9th Cir.· 1993-07-08
  The court held that the prisoner's waiver agreement for work credits was void and unenforceable, thus his contract clause and due process claims failed.
• Osborn v. Shillinger
  997 F.2d 1324· 10th Cir.· 1993-07-08
  The court held that the petitioner's guilty plea was voluntary and not coerced, and that the sentences imposed were not vindictive, thus affirming the district court's dismissal of the habeas corpus petition.
• Peltier v. G.L. Henman
  997 F.2d 461· 8th Cir.· 1993-07-07
  The court held that the government's prior arguments and statements did not constitute a concession that Peltier's conviction could only be sustained on an aiding and abetting theory, and that the exclusion of self-defense evidence was proper.
• Gibson v. Florida
  21 B.T.A. 1362· S.D. Fla.· 1993-07-06
  The court held that a petitioner seeking to appeal a denial of habeas corpus must obtain a certificate of probable cause, and that the petitioner's claim was procedurally barred due to failure to show cause and prejudice for a state procedural default.
• Edwards v. United States
  1993 WL 262598· M.D. Fla.· 1993-07-06
  The court held that a federal prisoner seeking to challenge the imposition or length of his sentence must first exhaust remedies under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 before seeking habeas corpus relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2241.
• Erick L. Kelly v. Roberts
  998 F.2d 802· 10th Cir.· 1993-07-06
  The dissenting judge believes the majority erred in its interpretation of the evidence regarding the defendant's involvement as an aider and abettor.
• Suniga v. R.J. Bunnell
  998 F.2d 664· 9th Cir.· 1993-07-02
  The court held that instructing the jury on a non-existent felony-murder theory, which was not relied upon by the prosecution, so infected the trial as to violate due process, requiring reversal of the habeas corpus denial.
• Williams v. Lord
  996 F.2d 1481· 2d Cir.· 1993-07-01
  The exclusion of evidence regarding the victim's prior violent acts, of which the defendant had no knowledge, does not violate the constitutional right to present a defense when the evidence has limited probative value and the state has legitimate interests in excluding it.
• Richardson v. Gramley
  998 F.2d 463· 7th Cir.· 1993-07-01
  The court held that the defendant's conviction was not final for retroactivity purposes when Batson was decided, entitling him to its retroactive application.
• Will Washington v. James
  996 F.2d 1442· 2d Cir.· 1993-06-29
  The court held that the habeas petition was barred by procedural default because the argument was not adequately preserved at the trial level.
• Mohamed Abdul Hafiz Eltabech v. Hopkins
  997 F.2d 386· 8th Cir.· 1993-06-28
  The court held that the inmate procedurally defaulted his claim regarding the right to testify and that his ineffective assistance of counsel claims lacked merit.
• Jones v. Dick Moore
  996 F.2d 943· 8th Cir.· 1993-06-28
  The court held that the inmate did not possess a liberty interest in participating in the Missouri Sexual Offenders Program (MOSOP) at the time he desired, and his prior escape attempt eliminated his availability for the program.
• Markham Duff-Smith v. Collins
  995 F.2d 545· 5th Cir.· 1993-06-28
  The court denied the motion for a certificate of probable cause and the motion for a stay of execution.
• Garnett R. Leacock v. Henman
  996 F.2d 1069· 10th Cir.· 1993-06-25
  The court held that a pro se litigant's allegations of interference with his right to self-representation, which impacted his ability to present a defense, constitute a challenge to the fact or duration of his confinement, properly brought under habeas corpus statutes, not solely
• Masoner v. Thurman
  996 F.2d 1003· 9th Cir.· 1993-06-24
  A due process challenge to inconsistent jury verdicts requires a showing that the verdicts are necessarily logically inconsistent; if a rational fact finder could have found a consistent set of facts supporting both convictions, the convictions will not be vacated.
• Brewer v. Lewis
  997 F.2d 550· 9th Cir.· 1993-06-22
  The court held that the panel erred in refusing to apply Circuit Rule 22-3, which mandates an automatic stay of execution for a first habeas corpus petition in a capital case, and in affirming the dismissal of the petition without an evidentiary hearing on the petitioner's compet
• Brown v. Burns
  996 F.2d 219· 9th Cir.· 1993-06-21
  The court held that the state court's finding that the offense occurred partly off-reservation was supported by the record, and the defendant knowingly and intelligently waived his right to a jury trial.
• Kendrick v. Carlson
  995 F.2d 1440· 8th Cir.· 1993-06-18
  The court held that a federal prisoner is not entitled to credit against a federal sentence for time spent incarcerated by a foreign sovereign for violating that sovereign's laws, even if the conduct is the same, and that a mistake in awarding credit to another prisoner does not
• Epperly v. E.L. Booker
  997 F.2d 1· 4th Cir.· 1993-06-15
  The court held that the circumstantial evidence was constitutionally sufficient to support a rational jury's finding of first-degree murder, and that the prosecutor's alleged misconduct did not violate due process.
• McKEE v. Crispus C. NIX
  995 F.2d 833· 8th Cir.· 1993-06-14 ·via Habeas Corpus Relief
  The court held that the district court properly denied the habeas corpus petition because the petitioner procedurally defaulted on most claims and the remaining claims lacked merit or were based on state law errors.
• Cortis v. Kenney
  995 F.2d 838· 8th Cir.· 1993-06-14
  The court held that inconsistent verdicts in separate bench trials do not violate the Constitution, and a petitioner cannot challenge Fourth Amendment claims on habeas review if they had a full opportunity to litigate them in state court.
• Gilbertson v. Tex. Bd. OF Pardons & Paroles
  993 F.2d 74· 5th Cir.· 1993-06-11 ·via Habeas Corpus Petition
  A Texas prison inmate does not possess a constitutionally protected interest in a tentative parole date and is not entitled to reasons for its denial or revision.
• Wilson v. Lindler
  995 F.2d 1256· 4th Cir.· 1993-06-11 ·via Federal Habeas Corpus
  The dissenting judge would reverse the district court's grant of the writ, finding no constitutional error regarding notice and that any error was invited or not prejudicial.
• Nethery v. Collins
  993 F.2d 1154· 5th Cir.· 1993-06-11
  The court held that the jury instructions prevented adequate consideration of mitigating evidence of voluntary intoxication, violating the Eighth Amendment.
• Russ v. Perrill
  995 F.2d 1001· 10th Cir.· 1993-06-10
  The failure to provide a timely early termination hearing under the Youth Corrections Act does not divest the Parole Commission of jurisdiction to revoke parole for subsequent violations, nor does the decision to return a parole violator to prison constitute an abuse of discretio
• DOW v. Cir. Court OF the First Cir.
  995 F.2d 922· 9th Cir.· 1993-06-10
  Mandatory attendance at an alcohol rehabilitation program constitutes 'custody' for the purposes of federal habeas corpus review under 28 U.S.C. § 2254(a).
• Spinelli v. Collins
  992 F.2d 559· 5th Cir.· 1993-06-08
  A defendant's mistaken belief about parole eligibility, not based on promises from the state, attorney, or court, is insufficient to invalidate a guilty plea, even if the state initiated plea negotiations.
• Vernell Carson v. Collins
  993 F.2d 461· 5th Cir.· 1993-06-08 ·via Habeas Corpus Petition
  The court held that the admission of a videotaped statement did not violate the Confrontation Clause because the victim testified at trial and was subject to cross-examination, and that the admission of the videotape and witness remarks did not render the trial fundamentally unfa
• Logan v. A.L. Lockhart
  994 F.2d 1324· 8th Cir.· 1993-06-07
  The court held that the trial court's decision to allow a potentially biased juror was supported by the record and that the exclusion of certain evidence did not violate due process. However, the district court erred in applying the concurrent sentence doctrine to dismiss a habea
• Standen v. Hard Whitley
  994 F.2d 1417· 9th Cir.· 1993-06-04
  The court held that a prior guilty plea, if improperly admitted, taints a jury verdict, entitling the defendant to a fair trial.
• Blair v. Armontrout
  994 F.2d 532· 8th Cir.· 1993-06-03
  The court held that its stay of execution continues until the time for filing a rehearing petition with the Supreme Court has expired, or until final action is taken on any such petition.
• Koetting v. R.G. Thompson
  995 F.2d 37· 5th Cir.· 1993-06-02
  The court held that the petition had an arguable basis in law and should not have been dismissed as legally frivolous, and that the district court's de novo review was presumed to be proper.
• United States v. Quillin Porter
  994 F.2d 470· 8th Cir.· 1993-05-27 ·via Habeas Corpus Petition
  The court held that the defendant's statements were not irreconcilably inconsistent to the degree required for a perjury conviction under 18 U.S.C. § 1623(c).