Habeas Corpus

18,793 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

• Arango v. Louie L. Wainwright
  739 F.2d 529· 11th Cir.· 1984-07-31
  The court clarified that its prior decision vacating a habeas corpus denial and remanding did not create precedent for delaying tactics or authorize federal stays of execution.
• Spiro Anast v. United States Parole Comm'n
  739 F.2d 403· 8th Cir.· 1984-07-30 ·via Habeas Corpus Under 28 U.S.C. § 2241
  The court held that the Parole Commission did not abuse its discretion in setting a parole date above the applicable guidelines, as it established good cause for its decision.
• McGEE v. Crist
  739 F.2d 505· 10th Cir.· 1984-07-16
  The court held that a defendant's attorney's failure to discover a state use immunity statute did not constitute ineffective assistance of counsel because the defendant could not show prejudice, as immunity could only be granted by the prosecution, not compelled by the defense or
• United States v. Greer
  739 F.2d 262· 7th Cir.· 1984-07-13
  The court held that the Illinois extended sentence statute, as applied to a brutal murder conviction, does not violate the Eighth Amendment, even in light of Solem v. Helm, because the petitioner did not claim his sentence was disproportionate to the crime.
• Blue v. Housewright
  739 F.2d 320· 8th Cir.· 1984-07-12
  The court held that a guilty plea is not rendered involuntary by an attorney's advice regarding the potential for capital felony murder charges, even if the application of the statute was uncertain.
• Williams v. Procunier
  735 F.2d 875· 5th Cir.· 1984-07-09
  The court held that the district court's findings of fact, based on an evidentiary hearing assessing witness credibility, were not clearly erroneous, and therefore affirmed the denial of habeas corpus relief.
• The United States ex rel. Antonio Roche v. Scully
  739 F.2d 739· 2d Cir.· 1984-07-03
  The court should remand to supplement the record regarding whether a reasonably competent New York attorney would have pressed the jurisdiction argument on appeal.
• Valdez v. Winans
  738 F.2d 1087· 10th Cir.· 1984-06-26
  The court held that the exclusion of the confession testimony, based on the attorney-client privilege, did not violate the defendant's constitutional rights, nor did the attorney's actions constitute ineffective assistance of counsel.
• Roberts v. Marshall
  736 F.2d 1126· 6th Cir.· 1984-06-22
  The court held that the jury instructions regarding 'purposely' for murder and 'knowingly' for drug possession did not violate due process, and that claims not objected to at trial were procedurally barred.
• Rogers v. White
  736 F.2d 483· 8th Cir.· 1984-06-20
  The court held that a conflict of interest from counsel seeking employment with the prosecuting attorney's office does not constitute a per se violation of the Sixth Amendment if no actual prejudice is shown.
• Distiso v. Louie Wainwright
  451 So. 2d 988· Fla. 2d DCA· 1984-06-13
  Distiso appealed the denial of his habeas corpus petition challenging Florida's grant of temporary custody to Pennsylvania under the Interstate Agreement on Detainers. The court reversed, holding that Pennsylvania failed to provide a duly certified copy of the charging complaint
• Ball v. State OF Ga.
  733 F.2d 1557· 11th Cir.· 1984-06-11 ·via Habeas Corpus Relief
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction for aggravated assault on a police officer and that the petitioner's Fourth Amendment claim was meritless.
• Storey v. Ponte
  735 F.2d 626· 1st Cir.· 1984-05-30
  The court held that the petitioner's claims were barred by procedural default or, alternatively, that he suffered no prejudice.
• Battieste v. City OF Baton Rouge
  732 F.2d 439· 5th Cir.· 1984-05-21
  A plaintiff who cannot meet the 'in custody' requirement for habeas corpus is not precluded from challenging the constitutionality of their state court conviction in a section 1983 action.
• Morgan v. Salamack
  735 F.2d 354· 2d Cir.· 1984-05-18
  A prosecutor is not constitutionally obligated to investigate a witness's background for impeachment evidence, and failure to do so does not violate due process, especially when the evidence is equally available to the defense.
• Archer v. State
  451 So. 2d 525· Fla. 2d DCA· 1984-05-18 ·via Writ Of Habeas Corpus
• Hair v. A.L. Lockhart
  734 F.2d 390· 8th Cir.· 1984-05-17
  The court held that convictions for rape and kidnapping do not violate the double jeopardy clause, and the district court did not err in refusing to appoint counsel for a habeas corpus petition.
• Doyle Dee Jones v. Parke
  734 F.2d 1142· 6th Cir.· 1984-05-10
  The court held that the record did not adequately develop facts to determine if the guilty plea was knowingly and intelligently made, requiring further proceedings.
• Young v. Duckworth
  733 F.2d 482· 7th Cir.· 1984-05-07
  The Sixth Amendment right to counsel attaches at the preliminary hearing where probable cause is determined to bind a case over to the grand jury, and a lapse in representation during this period requires reversal unless the state can prove no prejudice occurred.
• Pakulski v. Hickey
  731 F.2d 382· 6th Cir.· 1984-04-13
  The court held that the district court correctly dismissed the petitions for writs of habeas corpus, affirming the extradition of the appellants.
• Smith v. State
  448 So. 2d 20· Fla. 1st DCA· 1984-03-19 ·via Writ Of Habeas Corpus
  The court held that incarceration served as a condition of probation, even if it equals the maximum statutory sentence for the offense, is permissible and does not invalidate the probation order.
• Vazquez v. Scully
  730 F.2d 868· 2d Cir.· 1984-03-13
  The court held that the petitioner had not fairly presented his federal claims to the state courts, thus failing to exhaust available state remedies.
• Marrero v. City of Hialeah
  334 F.2d 506· S.D. Fla.· 1984-03-08
  The court held that the City was not liable under § 1983 because the plaintiffs failed to prove a custom or policy, and that the prosecutor was entitled to qualified immunity as his actions did not violate clearly established constitutional rights.
• Crick v. Smith
  729 F.2d 1038· 6th Cir.· 1984-03-06
  The court held that the state proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the juvenile court judge would have waived jurisdiction even if apprised of the omission of 'best interest' findings, rendering the due process violation harmless error.
• Hickey v. Solem
  728 F.2d 1149· 8th Cir.· 1984-03-06
  The court held that the undisclosed witness statement was not material to guilt or punishment, and therefore its suppression did not violate due process. The court also affirmed the lower court's finding that there was no prejudicial contact between the victim's relatives and the
• United States ex rel. Lavada Woollums v. Greer
  728 F.2d 918· 7th Cir.· 1984-02-24
  The court held that the petitioner's prosecution for aggravated battery after an ex parte judgment on an ordinance violation constituted double jeopardy because the offenses were the same and the ex parte judgment was criminal punishment.
• Maldonado v. Winans
  728 F.2d 438· 10th Cir.· 1984-02-22
  The court held that effective assistance of counsel is indispensable to a voluntary guilty plea, and the district court erred by focusing solely on voluntariness without considering ineffective assistance.
• Bryan v. Petrovsky
  726 F.2d 431· 8th Cir.· 1984-02-06
  The court held that the notice Bryan received when served with the parole violation warrant was sufficient, even if he did not receive a subsequent letter detailing the charges.
• Shelton v. A.L. Lockhart
  725 F.2d 82· 8th Cir.· 1984-01-23 ·via Habeas Corpus Petition
  The court affirmed the denial of the habeas corpus petition, finding no merit to the appellant's arguments.
• Hornsby v. Miller
  725 F.2d 1132· 7th Cir.· 1984-01-23
  Prison authorities have discretion to compute good time credits on a pro-rata basis for partial months served, consistent with statutory rates, absent an abuse of discretion.
• Arnold-Bey v. Frey
  725 F.2d 81· 8th Cir.· 1984-01-16
  The court affirmed the district court's denial of the habeas corpus petition, finding the appellant's claims to be without merit.
• Amidon v. Lehman
  730 F.2d 949· 4th Cir.· 1984-01-13
  The court held that the Government's position in extending the servicemen's enlistments was substantially justified, even if its underlying actions were flawed.
• Gibilaro v. LE Fevre
  725 F.2d 199· 2d Cir.· 1984-01-12
  The court held that the prosecutor's statement during summation, "That is the reason he did it," was a permissible argument based on the evidence, not an unconstitutional expression of personal opinion warranting habeas corpus relief.
• Richard v. Callahan
  723 F.2d 1028· 1st Cir.· 1983-12-27
  The court held that the petitioner's guilty plea to second degree murder was knowing and voluntary, and that the record supported a conviction on a joint venture theory, thus upholding the consecutive sentences.
• Louie L. Wainwright v. Cameron
  442 So. 2d 1089· Fla. 2d DCA· 1983-12-21 ·via Writ Of Habeas Corpus
• Campanale v. Harris
  724 F.2d 276· 2d Cir.· 1983-12-09
  A federal court should not grant habeas corpus relief for a claim based on a new Supreme Court rule if the petitioner has not first presented that claim to the state courts, absent specific exceptions to the exhaustion requirement.
• Curby C. Rife v. W.D. Blankenship
  721 F.2d 983· 4th Cir.· 1983-11-23 ·via Federal Habeas Corpus
  The court held that the evidence presented at trial was sufficient to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the bullet wound inflicted by the defendant caused the victim's death.
• United States ex rel. Randolph Williams v. Brown
  721 F.2d 1115· 7th Cir.· 1983-11-21
  The court held that trial counsel's representation fell below the minimum professional standards required by the Sixth Amendment, constituting ineffective assistance of counsel.
• United States v. Dir., Dep't OF Corr., State OF Ill.
  721 F.2d 586· 7th Cir.· 1983-11-16
  The court held that the district court erred in dismissing the habeas corpus petition for failure to exhaust state remedies, reversing the dismissal.
• Williams v. State
  440 So. 2d 512· Fla. 4th DCA· 1983-11-16
  Williams appealed a circuit court's denial without hearing of his Rule 3.850 motion raising constitutional challenges to his sexual battery conviction. The appellate court reversed, holding that the circuit court erred in denying the motion without a hearing when the record did n
• Maddox v. Montgomery
  718 F.2d 1033· 11th Cir.· 1983-11-03 ·via Habeas Corpus Petition
  The court held that the suppressed evidence was not material under Brady v. Maryland, and therefore, the appellant's due process rights were not violated.
• Davis v. Morris
  719 F.2d 324· 9th Cir.· 1983-10-28
  The court held that the denial of the defendant's motion for self-representation was proper given the factual circumstances, including potential disruption and lack of independent action.
• Almon v. Jernigan
  715 F.2d 1505· 11th Cir.· 1983-09-26
  The court held that the state trial court properly determined the prisoner's confession was voluntary and admissible, and thus the habeas corpus petition was correctly denied.
• Fair v. Zant
  715 F.2d 1519· 11th Cir.· 1983-09-26
  A guilty plea is involuntary and violates due process if entered based on a mistaken understanding of the law, induced by the trial judge, regarding the right to withdraw the plea.
• Martin v. Rose
  717 F.2d 295· 6th Cir.· 1983-09-16
  The court held that the district court correctly found ineffective assistance of counsel, as the state court's contrary findings were not supported by the record.
• Vail v. W.J. Estelle, Jr.
  711 F.2d 630· 5th Cir.· 1983-08-08
  A federal habeas court must consider a petition when state appellate procedures are so delayed as to render the exhaustion requirement meaningless, even if the petitioner has not exhausted state remedies.
• United States ex rel. Clifford Knights v. Wolff
  713 F.2d 240· 7th Cir.· 1983-07-08
  A habeas corpus petitioner is barred from raising constitutional claims in federal court if they were procedurally defaulted in state court, absent a showing of cause and actual prejudice.
• Anderson v. State OF S.C. & the Attorney Gen. of the State of S.C.
  709 F.2d 887· 4th Cir.· 1983-06-23
  The court held that the prosecutor's withholding of specifically and generally requested materials, including an autopsy report and police investigation reports, violated the defendant's due process rights.
• State OF Fla. ex rel. v. Crawford
  707 F.2d 472· 11th Cir.· 1983-06-16
  The appeal from the denial of a writ of habeas corpus seeking bail pending a state court appeal is moot because the state appeal has been decided.
• Bruce v. W.J. Estelle, Jr.
  707 F.2d 155· 5th Cir.· 1983-06-13
  The federal district court's handling or mishandling of a habeas corpus petition cannot serve as a basis for setting aside an otherwise valid state court conviction.