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

• Butler v. State
  600 So. 2d 56· Fla. 4th DCA· 1992-07-08 ·via Writ Of Habeas Corpus
  The court held that a motion for post-conviction relief is the appropriate avenue to seek a belated appeal based on ineffective assistance of counsel for failing to file an appeal.
• Bembury v. Butler
  968 F.2d 1399· 1st Cir.· 1992-07-07
  Although jury instructions on malice were constitutionally defective, the error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt because the evidence overwhelmingly supported the verdict independent of the erroneous instructions.
• Frink v. The State OF Iowa
  968 F.2d 734· 8th Cir.· 1992-07-06 ·via Federal Habeas Corpus
  The court held that a state prisoner's claims of ineffective assistance of counsel at trial, on appeal, and in post-conviction proceedings were without merit and did not warrant federal habeas corpus relief.
• Hollins v. Dep't of Corr.
  969 F.2d 606· 8th Cir.· 1992-07-01
  The court held that the denial of a writ of habeas corpus was proper because the trial court's alleged errors did not violate constitutional rights or render the trial fundamentally unfair.
• Resnover v. Linley E. Pearson
  965 F.2d 1453· 7th Cir.· 1992-06-25
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying the habeas corpus petition, affirming the denial of an evidentiary hearing and upholding the conviction and sentence.
• Johnson v. Collins
  964 F.2d 1527· 5th Cir.· 1992-06-23
  The court denied Johnson's request for a certificate of probable cause to appeal the denial of his habeas corpus petition.
• Clark v. Smith
  967 F.2d 1329· 9th Cir.· 1992-06-22
  The court held that the INS has statutory authority to detain an alien seeking admission, even during an appeal of an immigration judge's decision, and that the alien's petition for habeas corpus was properly denied.
• Roman-Nose v. NEW Mexico Dep't OF Human Servs.
  967 F.2d 435· 10th Cir.· 1992-06-19
  The court held that the district court had subject matter jurisdiction under the Indian Child Welfare Act, allowing the plaintiff to potentially amend her complaint.
• Deel v. Jago
  967 F.2d 1079· 6th Cir.· 1992-06-18
• White v. Keane
  969 F.2d 1381· 2d Cir.· 1992-06-18 ·via Habeas Corpus Petition
  The court held that retrial after a mistrial due to jury deadlock was permissible under the Double Jeopardy Clause, and the sentence imposed was not unconstitutionally harsh or the result of ineffective assistance of counsel.
• Jones v. McCAUGHTRY
  965 F.2d 473· 7th Cir.· 1992-06-15
  The court held that the destruction of a sperm sample, even if potentially useful, does not violate due process unless the defendant can show bad faith by the authorities and that the evidence had apparent exculpatory value and no comparable evidence was available.
• Bush v. Legursky
  966 F.2d 897· 4th Cir.· 1992-06-10
  The court held that the state courts' denial of Bush's habeas petition rested on an adequate and independent state ground, specifically Bush's procedural default in failing to object to the alibi instruction at trial.
• R.W. v. State
  599 So. 2d 286· Fla. 5th DCA· 1992-06-09 ·via Writ Of Habeas Corpus
• Gayle v. Mann
  966 F.2d 81· 2d Cir.· 1992-06-05
  The court held that the district court erred in dismissing the habeas petition as an abuse of the writ without determining if the petitioner was aware of all potentially damaging allegations in his presentence report.
• Clark A. Bailey v. State OF Minn.
  966 F.2d 372· 8th Cir.· 1992-06-04
  The court held that a defendant is not automatically entitled to withdraw a guilty plea when the sentencing court does not accept a sentencing recommendation, especially when the error has been corrected and the defendant received the benefit of the plea agreement.
• Baker v. Leapley
  965 F.2d 657· 8th Cir.· 1992-06-02
  The court held that federal courts are bound by a state court's interpretation of state law in habeas proceedings, and thus the district court properly dismissed the petition.
• Ebel Gaitan Campanioni v. Barr
  962 F.2d 461· 5th Cir.· 1992-05-27
  The court held that an order appointing counsel under the Criminal Justice Act, where no fees have been paid or claimed, is not an immediately appealable collateral order because it is effectively reviewable after final judgment and does not cause irreparable harm.
• Zoilo Linares and David Munoz v. Senkowski
  964 F.2d 1295· 2d Cir.· 1992-05-26
  The court held that the claim that a conviction is invalid because the prosecutor was not admitted to the bar constitutes a 'new rule' under Teague v. Lane, and therefore cannot be applied on federal habeas corpus review.
• Williamson v. Parke
  963 F.2d 863· 6th Cir.· 1992-05-07
  The court held that the district court's decision could be reversed using McNeil v. Wisconsin, as Teague v. Lane does not bar its application in this context, or alternatively, by applying existing Sixth Circuit precedent in Boles v. Foltz.
• Fitzgerald v. Armontrout
  963 F.2d 1062· 8th Cir.· 1992-05-05
  The court held that a habeas petitioner is barred from contesting identification testimony resulting from an allegedly unlawful arrest if they had a full and fair opportunity to litigate the issue in state court. The exclusion of defense witnesses did not violate Sixth Amendment
• Williams v. Dahm
  963 F.2d 216· 8th Cir.· 1992-05-01 ·via Habeas Corpus Petition
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction and that the petitioner failed to establish prejudice from counsel's alleged errors.
• Jefferson v. Morgan
  962 F.2d 1185· 6th Cir.· 1992-04-29
  The court held that a prima facie case of racial discrimination in grand jury selection was established and that the state failed to rebut it, thus affirming the grant of a writ of habeas corpus.
• Thomas v. Gunter
  962 F.2d 1477· 10th Cir.· 1992-04-28
  The court held that admitting videotaped depositions of child victims did not violate the appellant's Sixth Amendment right to confrontation, as the procedures met the standards set forth in Maryland v. Craig.
• Hackney v. Armontrout
  963 F.2d 179· 8th Cir.· 1992-04-28 ·via Habeas Corpus Petition
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying the habeas corpus petition, as the claims of ineffective assistance of counsel and insufficient evidence lacked merit.
• Vanda v. Lane
  962 F.2d 583· 7th Cir.· 1992-04-27
  The court held that the prosecution's use of the defendant's post-arrest silence and request for counsel was harmless error beyond a reasonable doubt, and that the Supreme Court's ruling in Wainwright v. Greenfield is not retroactive for habeas corpus cases.
• Greenawalt v. Ricketts
  961 F.2d 1457· 9th Cir.· 1992-04-23 ·via Habeas Corpus Review
• Gomez v. The United States Dist. Court FOR the N. Dist. OF Cal.
  966 F.2d 460· 9th Cir.· 1992-04-20
• Moss v. A.L. Lockhart
  971 F.2d 77· 8th Cir.· 1992-04-17 ·via Habeas Corpus Petition
  The court held that the jury instructions did not improperly shift the burden of proof to the defendant and that sufficient evidence supported the conviction.
• McDANIEL v. A.L. Lockhart
  961 F.2d 1358· 8th Cir.· 1992-04-16
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying the petition for a writ of habeas corpus because the appellant failed to prove his claims of perjury, improper admission of prior bad acts testimony, judicial misconduct, and Fifth Amendment violations.
• Oses v. Commonwealth of Mass.
  961 F.2d 985· 1st Cir.· 1992-04-15
  The court affirmed the grant of a conditional writ of habeas corpus, finding that the petitioner's Sixth Amendment right to self-representation was violated by the trial court's actions.
• Porter v. A.L. Lockhart
  961 F.2d 782· 8th Cir.· 1992-04-13 ·via Habeas Corpus Petition
  The court affirmed the dismissal of the habeas petition, finding that the state courts did not err in their conclusions regarding the identification procedures, arrest, and sufficiency of evidence.
• United States v. Mondee Stracener
  959 F.2d 31· 5th Cir.· 1992-04-09
  Resentencing, rather than a new trial, is the proper remedy when a defendant is convicted of multiple overlapping offenses and some convictions are vacated due to flawed jury instructions.
• Rickie Cummings v. Honorable Lawton Chiles
  600 So. 2d 1135· Fla. 1st DCA· 1992-04-08
  The court held that an inmate's right to legal assistance does not require appellees to serve pleadings on a fellow inmate assisting with the appeal.
• Cary R. Ortberg v. Russel Moody
  961 F.2d 135· 9th Cir.· 1992-04-03
  A request for a Certificate of Probable Cause can serve as a notice of appeal, and a nolo contendere plea bars challenges to pre-plea constitutional violations not related to the plea's voluntariness.
• Duffie S. Clark v. Thompson
  960 F.2d 663· 7th Cir.· 1992-04-03
  A prisoner challenging the procedures used to consider his parole application, rather than the legality of his confinement, does not need to exhaust state remedies before filing a federal suit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
• Ronney Lee Snyder v. Sumner
  960 F.2d 1448· 9th Cir.· 1992-04-03
  The Interstate Agreement on Detainers Act (IADA) applies to a prisoner even if the sending state grants parole after the prisoner is transferred to the receiving state. Parole status does not stop the IADA's 120-day clock.
• Abbott v. Cunningham
  959 F.2d 1· 1st Cir.· 1992-03-18
  The court held that the petitioner's due process rights were not violated by jury instructions on insanity and that the evidence supported the jury's finding that the petitioner was not insane.
• Closs v. Leapley
  959 F.2d 99· 8th Cir.· 1992-03-17
  The district court erred in summarily denying the habeas petition without independently reviewing the state trial court record.
• Seibert v. Dugger
  595 So. 2d 1083· Fla. 1st DCA· 1992-03-17
  Michael Seibert, an inmate, appealed the denial of his petition for writ of mandamus challenging his disciplinary hearing. The court reversed in part, finding that the trial court erred in summarily denying his claim that a correctional officer's presence and participation at his
• Huston v. Denis Dowd
  960 F.2d 718· 8th Cir.· 1992-03-16
  The court held that the prisoner's habeas corpus petition was properly denied as moot because he had received all the relief he requested, including a hearing and release on parole.
• Olan Randle Robison v. Maynard
  958 F.2d 1013· 10th Cir.· 1992-03-12 ·via Federal Habeas Corpus
  The court affirmed the dismissal of the appellant's second and third federal habeas corpus petitions and the denial of his Rule 60(b) motion, finding he failed to meet the standards for successive or abusive claims.
• Davis v. State OF Neb.
  958 F.2d 831· 8th Cir.· 1992-03-11
  The court held that the state court's retroactive application of its interpretation of the habitual criminal statute, which combined elements of two prior convictions in an unforeseeable manner, violated the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
• Sullivan v. A.L. Lockhart
  958 F.2d 823· 8th Cir.· 1992-03-10
  The court affirmed the district court's denial of the habeas corpus petition, finding no error in its rulings on the various claims raised by the appellant.
• Roehler v. Borg
  957 F.2d 729· 9th Cir.· 1992-03-04
• Wood v. State OF Alaska
  957 F.2d 1544· 9th Cir.· 1992-02-28
  Excluding evidence of M.G.'s prior sexual conduct did not violate Wood's Sixth Amendment rights because the evidence was not relevant or its probative value was outweighed by prejudicial effect and other legitimate interests.
• Lowe v. Hon. Thomas M. Coker, Jr.
  593 So. 2d 624· Fla. 4th DCA· 1992-02-26
• Fischer v. Powers
  957 F.2d 609· 8th Cir.· 1992-02-26
  The admission of a certified laboratory report into evidence, even without the direct testimony of the analyst, does not violate the Sixth Amendment confrontation clause when the state provides a mechanism for the defendant to subpoena the analyst.
• Dulin v. Cook
  957 F.2d 758· 10th Cir.· 1992-02-18
  The court held that a prisoner's claim of lack of access to state appellate rules due to incarceration in another state may constitute 'cause' for procedural default, requiring further factual inquiry.
• Matney v. Armontrout
  956 F.2d 824· 8th Cir.· 1992-02-11
  The court held that police deception of an attorney attempting to contact a suspect does not violate the suspect's constitutional rights if the suspect voluntarily waives their rights. It also held that alleged errors by trial counsel did not constitute ineffective assistance of
• Mitchell v. Dugger
  595 So. 2d 942· Fla.· 1992-02-06
  Appellate counsel was not ineffective for failing to argue the trial judge erred in preventing inquiry into the nature of a state witness's prior convictions.