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

• State of Fla. ex rel. Peter J. Latino v. Buchanan
  189 So. 2d 529· Fla. 3d DCA· 1966-08-02 ·via Writ Of Habeas Corpus
  The court held that a petitioner in a habeas corpus proceeding for extradition can be called as an adverse witness by the opposing counsel.
• Bevins v. Klinger
  365 F.2d 752· 9th Cir.· 1966-07-22
  A defendant waives the right to challenge the nature of prior convictions for habitual criminal status by admitting them, unless the objection is raised at trial.
• Hayes v. Peyton
  364 F.2d 303· 4th Cir.· 1966-07-21
  A defective indictment for murder, which sufficiently informed the accused of the nature of the charge and did not mislead him, is not grounds for federal habeas corpus relief.
• Johnstone v. Swenson
  363 F.2d 643· 8th Cir.· 1966-07-14
  The court held that the petitioner's due process rights were not violated by the prosecutor's reference to prior convictions during voir dire or by the use of a federal conviction for enhancement under the Missouri Habitual Criminal Act. The court also found the petitioner's conf
• United States ex rel. Ralph Joseph Blasser v. Hon. Harold W. Follette [successor to Edward M. Fay] as Warden of Green Haven Prison
  364 F.2d 319· 2d Cir.· 1966-07-12
  The appeal is dismissed as moot because the petitioner is no longer incarcerated and is on parole, rendering the original issue of his alleged unlawful abduction moot.
• Delgado v. Narciso Galarza Cruz
  363 F.2d 430· 1st Cir.· 1966-07-08
  The court held that the district court erred in granting habeas corpus relief based on Escobedo and Jackson v. Denno, as the petitioner's claims were either inapplicable, not properly exhausted, or not adequately proven.
• Wall v. State
  189 So. 2d 365· Fla.· 1966-07-08 ·via Writ Of Habeas Corpus
  The Florida Supreme Court dismissed an appeal from a decision affirming the denial of post-conviction relief, finding the court lacked jurisdiction. The court also denied a separate petition for a writ of habeas corpus.
• Commonwealth OF Pa. ex rel. Ernest Earl Storch v. Maroney
  363 F.2d 149· 3d Cir.· 1966-07-07
  The court held that the use of a confession obtained without informing the suspect of his right to counsel does not automatically invalidate a conviction predating the Miranda and Escobedo decisions if the confession was otherwise voluntary.
• Cardillo v. Olin G. Blackwell
  365 F.2d 301· 3d Cir.· 1966-07-06
  The court held that the district court did not err in dismissing the petition for a writ of habeas corpus.
• Bashlor v. Wainwright
  189 So. 2d 800· Fla.· 1966-07-06
  The Court held that the rule established in Escobedo v. State of Illinois, concerning the right to counsel during custodial interrogation, is not to be applied retrospectively to cases that predated its decision. Furthermore, while indigent defendants have a right to appeal, the
• Junior Ray Lester v. Wilson
  363 F.2d 824· 9th Cir.· 1966-06-29
  A habeas corpus petitioner is not entitled to relief based on a claim that a confession was obtained without Miranda warnings if the confession predates the effective date of Miranda and Escobedo, and the confession was not otherwise involuntary.
• Newell v. Page
  362 F.2d 538· 10th Cir.· 1966-06-27
  The court held that the state did not lose or waive jurisdiction to enforce the original sentence by surrendering the appellant to federal authorities after his escape.
• Broadway Arrington v. Willingham
  362 F.2d 803· 10th Cir.· 1966-06-14
  The court held that a denial of a Section 2255 motion without a hearing is not sufficient to establish that the remedy is inadequate or ineffective, thus barring a subsequent habeas corpus petition.
• Application of John Thomas Glazewski for a Writ of Habeas Corpus. John Thomas Glazewski
  361 F.2d 971· 3d Cir.· 1966-06-09 ·via Writ Of Habeas Corpus
  The District Court did not err in denying the petition for a writ of habeas corpus.
• United States ex rel. Barney P. Bennett v. Pate
  362 F.2d 89· 7th Cir.· 1966-06-08
  The court held that the district court was justified in dismissing the habeas corpus petition, as the petitioner's grounds for relief were without merit and he was not prejudiced by the assistance of counsel he did not desire.
• Carroll v. Crouse
  361 F.2d 903· 10th Cir.· 1966-06-07
  The court held that the appellant had not exhausted his state remedies, making his federal habeas corpus petition premature.
• DeHAM v. Decker
  361 F.2d 477· 5th Cir.· 1966-06-02
  The court held that the evidence supporting the conviction was not so insufficient as to violate due process, and thus no federal question was presented.
• Holman v. Lawhon
  362 F.2d 1· 5th Cir.· 1966-05-23
  The court held that the district court erred in granting habeas corpus relief because the petitioner failed to demonstrate that the exclusion of the witness's testimony caused prejudice or injury.
• Mink v. Kropp
  361 F.2d 323· 6th Cir.· 1966-05-17 ·via Writ Of Habeas Corpus
  The appellate court affirmed the district court's denial of the writ of habeas corpus, finding the district court's assessment of evidence was supported.
• Hoard v. Dutton
  360 F.2d 673· 5th Cir.· 1966-05-13
  The court held that the appellant was not denied effective assistance of counsel and that the sentences imposed do not constitute cruel and unusual punishment.
• Sharp v. Ciccone
  360 F.2d 605· 8th Cir.· 1966-05-13
  The appeal is dismissed as moot because the appellant is no longer in the custody of the respondent warden, having been paroled.
• Hill v. Crouse
  360 F.2d 603· 10th Cir.· 1966-05-12
  The rule announced in Jencks v. United States, requiring production of certain government witness statements for impeachment, is not applicable to state criminal trials as it is not rooted in the U.S. Constitution.
• Gentry v. State
  186 So. 2d 531· Fla. 1st DCA· 1966-05-12
  Gentry appeals the trial court's denial of his motion to correct court records and vacate his 1951 armed robbery conviction, claiming he lacked counsel at arraignment and sentencing despite records indicating otherwise. The appellate court reverses and remands for a hearing after
• Walton v. Peyton
  360 F.2d 935· 4th Cir.· 1966-05-10
  The court held that a state court transcript, though not formally certified, is admissible in federal court if its accuracy is guaranteed by the attorneys involved and not disputed.
• Clark v. Crouse
  359 F.2d 785· 10th Cir.· 1966-04-26
  The court held that while state remedies may not be fully exhausted, their effectiveness must be considered, potentially entitling the petitioner to a federal evidentiary hearing.
• United States ex rel. Andrew J. DeVONEY v. Pate
  359 F.2d 828· 7th Cir.· 1966-04-22
  The court held that the petitioner's interpretation of Rule 16 was incorrect and that habeas corpus would not lie even if his claim were valid.
• Webb v. Crouse
  359 F.2d 394· 10th Cir.· 1966-04-21
  The court held that the district court correctly denied the petitioner's request to reopen his habeas corpus petition without a hearing.
• Sanders v. COX
  359 F.2d 782· 10th Cir.· 1966-04-19
  The court held that the lower courts failed to consider all relevant factors, including potential constitutional violations preceding the guilty pleas, when determining the voluntariness of those pleas.
• United States ex rel. Edward J. Smith v. Russell
  359 F.2d 795· 3d Cir.· 1966-04-15
  The court held that a voluntary guilty plea negates claims of prejudice from prior events, including coerced statements or denial of trial rights.
• Rogers Merritt v. State
  359 F.2d 793· 5th Cir.· 1966-04-06
  The court held that the district court should reconsider the habeas corpus petition, particularly regarding the exhaustion of state remedies and the potential claim of illegal search and seizure.
• Elauterio Orosco v. COX
  359 F.2d 764· 10th Cir.· 1966-04-06
  The court held that the prisoner's confinement was lawful, affirming the denial of his habeas corpus petition.
• United States ex rel. Willie Fernanders v. Hon. Walter M. Wallack
  359 F.2d 767· 2d Cir.· 1966-04-05
  The court held that a prosecutor's opening statement reference to a coerced confession, when later excluded by the judge and not objected to by defense counsel, does not automatically violate due process.
• Herrera v. COX
  358 F.2d 942· 10th Cir.· 1966-03-30
  The court held that a delay between arrest and preliminary hearing does not divest jurisdiction if the defendant waives the objection by pleading and proceeding to trial without asserting prejudice.
• Carter v. State OF NEW Mexico
  358 F.2d 710· 10th Cir.· 1966-03-25 ·via Writ Of Habeas Corpus
  The court held that technical objections regarding the incorporation of the penitentiary do not raise federal constitutional issues entitling prisoners to federal habeas corpus relief.
• Sweeney v. Balkcom
  358 F.2d 415· 5th Cir.· 1966-03-22
  The court held that Georgia's statutory scheme, which grants certain public officials the right to appear before a grand jury before indictment for malfeasance in office, does not violate the Equal Protection Clause when applied to a non-official charged with robbery.
• Johnson v. State
  184 So. 2d 161· Fla.· 1966-03-16
  Johnson challenged his conviction and consecutive sentences imposed without counsel assistance. The Florida Supreme Court held that Criminal Rule of Procedure No. 1 permits a prisoner to attack multiple consecutive sentences simultaneously if he would be entitled to release from
• United States ex rel. Luther C. Williams v. Hedrick
  356 F.2d 430· 7th Cir.· 1966-02-24
  A federal court need not require a petitioner to litigate a disavowed issue in state court as a prerequisite for federal habeas corpus relief.
• Neal v. State
  183 So. 2d 543· Fla.· 1966-02-23 ·via Writ Of Habeas Corpus
  Petitioner sought a writ of habeas corpus, claiming a prior Florida conviction for forgery was obtained without counsel and was now extending his New Jersey imprisonment. The Florida Supreme Court found the petition without merit because the petitioner had already served his Flor
• Elester S. Roberts v. State
  188 So. 2d 302· Fla.· 1966-02-23 ·via Writ Of Habeas Corpus
  The court held that the petition for a writ of habeas corpus was without merit because no judicial confession was made or introduced against the petitioner, and he was not denied due process or counsel.
• Gordon v. Crouse
  357 F.2d 174· 10th Cir.· 1966-02-21
  The court held that the district court properly denied federal habeas relief because the appellant had not exhausted his state court remedies when the federal court acted.
• Lovedahl v. State OF N.C.
  356 F.2d 930· 4th Cir.· 1966-02-21
  The court affirmed the dismissal of the habeas corpus petition, finding the district court's factual determination of competency was not clearly erroneous.
• Finton v. Ward Lane
  356 F.2d 850· 7th Cir.· 1966-02-14
  The court held that the petitioner was not denied a speedy trial because the delay was not purposeful, oppressive, or vexatious, and did not prejudice his defense.
• Sandsbury LEE v. Louie L. Wainwright
  356 F.2d 507· 5th Cir.· 1966-02-11
  The court held that the appellant's contentions regarding his sentence enhancement and the temporary absence of the court reporter lacked merit. The court also noted that the claim regarding the void prior conviction was not properly raised.
• Reay v. Turner
  356 F.2d 418· 10th Cir.· 1966-02-04
  The court held that the petitioner had not exhausted his state remedies, and his petition for habeas corpus was therefore properly denied.
• Morris v. State OF S.C. & Ellis C. MacDougall
  356 F.2d 432· 4th Cir.· 1966-02-01
  The court held that the record was inadequate for review and remanded the cases to the District Court for further proceedings.
• McBEE v. Weaver
  355 F.2d 445· 6th Cir.· 1966-02-01
  The court held that the district court erred in denying a habeas corpus petition without a hearing, as the issue of adequate cross-examination opportunity requires factual determination.
• Falagan v. State
  182 So. 2d 61· Fla. 1st DCA· 1966-01-25
  Morris Morgan Falagan, an indigent defendant, appealed an order denying his motion for discharge under Florida Criminal Procedure Rule 1, filing petitions for mandamus and habeas corpus. The court affirmed the lower court's order, holding that Rule 1 proceedings do not entitle an
• Daugherty v. State OF Md.
  355 F.2d 803· 4th Cir.· 1966-01-20
  The court held that the petitioner's detention beyond his criminal sentence term did not invalidate the subsequent defective delinquent adjudication, as the state court had continuing jurisdiction and no due process violation occurred.
• Sebring v. Beto
  354 F.2d 1000· 5th Cir.· 1966-01-11 ·via Writ Of Habeas Corpus
  The court held that the petitioner received effective assistance of counsel and was not denied his right to confrontation.
• In re Internal Gov't of the Dist. Court of Appeal
  181 So. 2d 363· Fla. 4th DCA· 1966-01-11
  The Fourth District Court of Appeal of Florida adopted a rule allowing the Clerk to file and docket notices of appeal from orders on motions for relief under Criminal Procedure Rule No. 1 without requiring any fees or costs, similar to habeas corpus proceedings. This rule applies