Habeas Corpus

18,793 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 3,112 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• Hancock v. Sheriff Bill Decker
  379 F.2d 552· 5th Cir.· 1967-06-20
  The court held that the Texas courts' interpretation of their theft statute was not unreasonable or arbitrary, and thus affirmed the denial of habeas corpus.
• Walls v. State
  199 So. 2d 724· Fla.· 1967-05-31
  Richard Walls petitioned for habeas corpus challenging his 1961 guilty plea conviction for breaking and entering and petit larceny. The Florida Supreme Court vacated his conviction, finding that he was denied his constitutional right to counsel without a knowing and intelligent w
• Yates v. Peyton
  378 F.2d 57· 4th Cir.· 1967-05-30
  The court held that there was no actual conflict of interest or unfairness warranting retroactive application of a per se rule.
• Leal v. Beto
  378 F.2d 8· 5th Cir.· 1967-05-25
  The court held that even if the evidence was seized in violation of the Fourth Amendment, the petitioner is not entitled to habeas corpus relief because Mapp v. Ohio is not retroactive and prior Texas law does not create federal habeas grounds.
• Townsend v. Dutton
  377 F.2d 539· 5th Cir.· 1967-05-24
  The court affirmed the denial of habeas corpus relief, finding the petitioner intelligently waived his right to counsel.
• Joseph v. Klinger
  378 F.2d 308· 9th Cir.· 1967-05-12
  The court held that the appellant's conviction and sentence were not subject to retroactive application of new constitutional rules and that his claims of error lacked merit.
• Collins v. Cameron
  377 F.2d 945· D.C. Cir.· 1967-04-21
  The court held that detention under D.C.Code § 24-301(d) is not punitive but serves public protection and rehabilitation, and the petitioner bears the burden of proving eligibility for release.
• Walls v. Genung
  198 So. 2d 30· Fla.· 1967-04-19
  This habeas corpus case addresses whether an indigent defendant awaiting trial can be released on his own recognizance without posting bail surety. The Florida Supreme Court holds that a state may require bail security even from an insolvent defendant, rejecting the claim that su
• Weber v. Rivers
  376 F.2d 604· 4th Cir.· 1967-04-07
  The court held that the District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia lacked personal jurisdiction over the District of Columbia Parole Board and should have transferred the cases to the District of Columbia Circuit.
• Baker v. Louie L. Wainwright
  197 So. 2d 290· Fla.· 1967-04-05
  Baker sought habeas corpus relief claiming deprivation of his constitutional right to counsel on appeal after his public defender terminated representation, concluding no legitimate basis for appeal existed. The Florida Supreme Court held that the constitutional right to counsel
• Solomon v. Cameron
  377 F.2d 170· D.C. Cir.· 1967-04-03
  The appeal is dismissed as moot because the appellant has been unconditionally released from the hospital.
• Schneider v. Wainwright
  375 F.2d 446· 5th Cir.· 1967-04-03
  The court held that the appellant's confession, made before Escobedo and Miranda, was admissible because those decisions do not apply retroactively.
• Jacobs v. Brough
  375 F.2d 606· 4th Cir.· 1967-03-28
  The court held that the Maryland Court of Appeals' decision invalidating the religious oath for grand jurors was correctly applied prospectively, and thus the appellant, whose conviction became final before that decision, was not entitled to release on habeas corpus.
• Hubbard v. Patterson
  374 F.2d 856· 10th Cir.· 1967-03-16
  The court held that the totality of circumstances supported the trial court's finding that consent to search was voluntary, despite the denial of the appellant's request to speak to his father and the delay in bringing him before a Justice of the Peace.
• James v. Breckenridge
  374 F.2d 857· 10th Cir.· 1967-03-09
  The court held that the appellant had not exhausted his state remedies, as habeas corpus was not the proper procedure in Colorado for the issues raised.
• Tshaka Zekelkeyzula v. Patterson
  373 F.2d 522· 10th Cir.· 1967-03-01
  A habeas corpus petition alleging a coerced guilty plea based on a subjective belief in a plea deal, even if no actual deal existed, is sufficient to warrant an evidentiary hearing.
• Earnest Peterson v. Wilson
  373 F.2d 737· 9th Cir.· 1967-02-27
  The court held that the district court erred in denying the habeas corpus petition without issuing an order to show cause, as factual issues regarding ineffective assistance of counsel and an involuntary guilty plea required further development.
• Barrera v. Beto
  373 F.2d 333· 5th Cir.· 1967-02-21
  The court held that the Escobedo and Miranda rulings are not retroactive and do not apply to trials commenced before their respective dates.
• Bowie v. Wilson
  373 F.2d 514· 9th Cir.· 1967-02-15
• Anaya v. Rodriguez
  372 F.2d 683· 10th Cir.· 1967-02-13
  The court held that a guilty plea entered by an attorney with the defendant's knowledge and consent, even without direct inquiry to the defendant, does not violate due process.
• Resor v. Rodriguez
  373 F.2d 20· 10th Cir.· 1967-02-13
  The court held that the arraignment record was properly admitted and showed a knowing and voluntary guilty plea, despite claims of coercion and procedural defects.
• Herring v. Rodriguez
  372 F.2d 470· 10th Cir.· 1967-02-08
  The court held that the dismissal of the federal habeas corpus petition without prejudice was not erroneous because the appellant had failed to exhaust his available state remedies.
• Fitzpatrick v. Patterson
  373 F.2d 24· 10th Cir.· 1967-02-08 ·via Federal Habeas Corpus
  The court held that the case should be remanded to the trial court to consider constitutional objections that may have been presented to the state court but not reflected in its opinion.
• McDONALD v. Kropp
  373 F.2d 549· 6th Cir.· 1967-02-07
  The District Court abused its discretion by holding an evidentiary hearing and making contrary findings of fact when the state court hearing was full, fair, and adequate.
• Nolen v. Wilson
  372 F.2d 15· 9th Cir.· 1967-02-01 ·via Federal Habeas Corpus
  The court held that the appellant's state court conviction did not violate his constitutional right to due process, despite claims of trial errors.
• Christian v. Buchanan
  373 F.2d 32· 5th Cir.· 1967-01-24
  The court held that the district court must develop the record to determine if federally required gambling records were introduced against the appellants in state court before considering their Fifth Amendment claim.
• Sobota v. Rodriguez
  371 F.2d 909· 10th Cir.· 1967-01-19
  A voluntary and understanding guilty plea waives prior procedural defects, and a petitioner's unsupported testimony of misrepresentation by counsel does not ordinarily require setting aside a guilty plea on collateral attack.
• Petition of Leo Robert Forcella for a Writ of Habeas Corpus
  371 F.2d 37· 3d Cir.· 1967-01-17
  The court held that the defendant was denied due process due to prejudicial statements made during voir dire and his exclusion from a chambers conference.
• Adargo v. Patterson
  371 F.2d 822· 10th Cir.· 1967-01-13
  The court held that the appellant had not exhausted his state remedies because the Colorado Supreme Court had not yet finally determined his writ of error concerning his original conviction.
• Fields v. Heer
  371 F.2d 397· 6th Cir.· 1967-01-12
  The court held that the petitioner received effective assistance of counsel and that his guilty plea was voluntary, despite his fear of a harsher sentence.
• Mora v. Patterson
  370 F.2d 923· 10th Cir.· 1967-01-11
  The court held that the petitioner failed to show a violation of any federally protected right regarding his parole revocation and custody.
• United States ex rel. Edward Suarez v. Hon. Harold W. Follette (successor to Hon. Edward M. Fay)
  371 F.2d 426· 2d Cir.· 1967-01-10
  The court held that evidence obtained was not the result of illegal police conduct, even if some actions were questionable.
• United States ex rel. Ray Meholchick v. Rundle
  371 F.2d 1014· 3d Cir.· 1966-12-30
  The court held that both state and federal courts had fully and properly addressed the petitioner's claims in prior habeas corpus proceedings.
• McCONNELL v. Patterson
  370 F.2d 41· 10th Cir.· 1966-12-16
  The court affirmed the dismissal of the habeas corpus petition, finding no constitutional violations.
• Davis v. Kropp
  369 F.2d 342· 6th Cir.· 1966-12-08
  The court held that the statements made by the appellant were not involuntary confessions and did not violate his constitutional rights, and that he was not denied competent counsel.
• Wilson v. State OF Cal.
  368 F.2d 843· 9th Cir.· 1966-11-16
  The court held that the denial of habeas corpus was proper because the speedy trial claim was previously adjudicated and the confession claim was barred by non-retroactivity of Escobedo.
• United States ex rel. v. Major General Thomas Yancey
  368 F.2d 816· 2d Cir.· 1966-11-14
  The court held that a registrant's failure to timely inform his draft board of his National Guard membership, and his subsequent failure to demonstrate a change in status, precluded reopening his classification after an induction notice was issued.
• Novarro v. Pitchess
  368 F.2d 803· 9th Cir.· 1966-11-14
  The court held that the failure to have the arresting officer sign the complaint does not present a federal question depriving the defendant of constitutional rights.
• Sartain v. Pitchess
  368 F.2d 806· 9th Cir.· 1966-11-10 ·via Writ Of Habeas Corpus
  A California parole agent has the authority to place a 'hold' on a parolee who is already in custody, as this is a preliminary measure pending investigation or prosecution.
• Burdick v. Allgood
  368 F.2d 818· 5th Cir.· 1966-11-03
  The district court erred in denying a writ of habeas corpus without a plenary evidentiary hearing.
• Walker v. Brough
  368 F.2d 349· 4th Cir.· 1966-10-19
  The court held that the grounds for releasing the appellant were too hypothetical and tenuous to sustain a charge of constitutional invalidity.
• Donaldson v. Beto
  367 F.2d 158· 5th Cir.· 1966-10-12 ·via Federal Habeas Corpus
  The failure to inform a defendant of their right to counsel and to subpoena witnesses at an examining trial does not vitiate a conviction based on a subsequent guilty plea entered with counsel.
• United States ex rel. James W. Harbold v. Myers
  367 F.2d 53· 3d Cir.· 1966-10-06
  The court held that handcuffing a defendant for one day based on counsel's concerns about instability and escape does not violate due process, and that a claim regarding the voluntary withdrawal of post-trial motions was not exhausted in state court.
• McCREARY v. Wilson
  366 F.2d 508· 9th Cir.· 1966-09-23
  The court held that the constitutional standards existing at the time of the conviction, not later ones, apply to the appellant's claims.
• Caudill v. Peyton
  368 F.2d 563· 4th Cir.· 1966-09-21
  The court held that the issue of whether the petitioner received a public trial must first be determined by the Virginia courts.
• Ruchell Magee v. State OF Cal.
  365 F.2d 831· 9th Cir.· 1966-09-16
• Jack v. Rhay
  366 F.2d 191· 9th Cir.· 1966-09-14
  The appellate court affirmed the district court's denial of the habeas corpus petition, finding the petitioner's claims regarding unlawful arrest, search, and limited jury argument time to be without merit.
• Jagiello v. State
  190 So. 2d 18· Fla. 1st DCA· 1966-09-01 ·via Writ Of Habeas Corpus
  The appellate court affirmed the denial of a habeas corpus petition, clarifying that habeas corpus is not a substitute for an appeal from a denial of a Rule 1 motion, and that a prior denial of such a motion would preclude further relief via habeas corpus.
• Meyer v. Klinger
  364 F.2d 823· 9th Cir.· 1966-08-08
  The court held that the petitioner's reliance on Escobedo v. Illinois was foreclosed by subsequent precedent.
• Herrera v. Wilson
  364 F.2d 798· 9th Cir.· 1966-08-05
  The court held that the use of preliminary hearing testimony, where the defendant was represented by counsel who cross-examined the witness, did not violate federal constitutional rights, even if presented unconventionally.