Habeas Corpus

18,780 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count

• United States ex rel. David Frank Goldberg v. Warden, Allenwood Federal Prison Camp, Montgomery, Pennsylvania
  622 F.2d 60· 3d Cir.· 1980-06-09 ·cited 34×
  The phrase 'with prejudice' in a plea agreement does not preclude the Parole Commission from considering the conduct underlying dismissed charges when determining parole eligibility.
• Shahid v. Crawford
  599 F.2d 666· 5th Cir.· 1979-07-27 ·cited 34×
  The United States Parole Commission is not required to grant parole based solely on superior institutional adjustment, and its written reasons for denial substantially complied with statutory requirements.
• Sinclair v. Blackburn
  599 F.2d 673· 5th Cir.· 1979-07-27 ·cited 34×
  The court held that a prior conviction's collateral consequences were too speculative and remote to establish federal habeas corpus jurisdiction after the sentence for that conviction had expired.
• United States v. Dohm
  597 F.2d 535· 5th Cir.· 1979-06-21 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the government can use a criminal defendant's statements made in a pre-trial bail hearing to prove guilt at trial, contrary to established precedent.
• Borodine v. Douzanis
  592 F.2d 1202· 1st Cir.· 1979-02-21 ·cited 34×
  The court held that initial police questioning was general on-scene questioning, not custodial interrogation, and thus did not require Miranda warnings. It also held that the prosecutor's closing argument, while containing some improper remarks, did not deprive the defendant of a
• Cervantes v. Walker
  589 F.2d 424· 9th Cir.· 1978-11-08 ·cited 34×
  The court held that Miranda warnings were required in this prison setting.
• Miller v. State OF N.C.
  583 F.2d 701· 4th Cir.· 1978-09-29 ·cited 34×
  The court held that a prosecutor's racially inflammatory remarks during closing arguments in a rape trial so infected the proceedings with unfairness as to deny the defendants due process of law.
• Jago v. United States Dist. Court
  570 F.2d 618· 6th Cir.· 1978-02-02 ·cited 34×
  A district court retains jurisdiction to issue orders regarding a prisoner's custody, including granting bail, even after a notice of appeal has been filed in a habeas corpus proceeding.
• Fielding v. LeFEVRE
  548 F.2d 1102· 2d Cir.· 1977-01-19 ·cited 34×
  The court affirmed the denial of the writ of habeas corpus, holding that the petitioner failed to exhaust state remedies for his Sixth Amendment claim and that his Eighth Amendment claims lacked merit.
• Napier v. Sister Mary Gertrude
  542 F.2d 825· 10th Cir.· 1976-10-12 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the case was moot because the appellant had been released from custody and the issue was not capable of repetition yet evading review, nor was it a certified class action.
• Carolee Biddy v. Diamond
  516 F.2d 118· 5th Cir.· 1975-07-18 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the petitioner's statements and conduct were admissible because she was properly informed of her Miranda rights and voluntarily waived them, and that the photographs did not constitute a Brady violation.
• United States ex rel. Theodore Geisler v. Walters
  510 F.2d 887· 3d Cir.· 1975-02-05 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the petitioner had exhausted his state remedies, either through prior rulings or due to circumstances rendering the state process ineffective, and thus was entitled to federal habeas corpus relief.
• Wolfs v. Britton
  509 F.2d 304· 8th Cir.· 1975-01-31 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the denial of a continuance, which prevented defense counsel from adequately preparing for trial, amounted to a denial of the Sixth Amendment right to effective assistance of counsel.
• Burston v. Caldwell
  506 F.2d 24· 5th Cir.· 1975-01-06 ·cited 34×
• Sanders v. Conine
  506 F.2d 530· 10th Cir.· 1974-12-02 ·cited 34×
  A complaint alleging abuse of extradition power by noncompliance with law states a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and cannot be dismissed as frivolous.
• Wiegand v. Honorable William H. Seaver
  504 F.2d 303· 5th Cir.· 1974-11-14 ·cited 34×
  Florida's breach of the peace and disorderly conduct statute (F.S. 877.03) is unconstitutionally overbroad because it fails to distinguish between protected and unprotected speech and has not been authoritatively construed to limit its application solely to unprotected expression
• Small v. Britton
  500 F.2d 299· 10th Cir.· 1974-07-30 ·cited 34×
  The court held that a parole revocation hearing is not required until a parole revocation warrant is executed, and incarceration in a state institution is a valid reason for delay in execution.
• Calley v. Callaway
  496 F.2d 701· 5th Cir.· 1974-06-13 ·cited 34×
  The court held that bail should only be granted pending postconviction habeas corpus review when substantial constitutional claims with a high probability of success are raised, along with extraordinary circumstances making the remedy effective.
• Levy v. Parker
  478 F.2d 772· 3d Cir.· 1973-04-18 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the joinder of unconstitutional charges with a valid charge did not substantially prejudice the defendant's right to a fair trial on the valid charge, nor did it rebut the presumption of validity for the general sentence.
• HAM v. State OF N.C.
  471 F.2d 406· 4th Cir.· 1973-01-11 ·cited 34×
  A prisoner is entitled to credit for pre-sentence confinement time, especially if indigent, even if state law and prior state court rulings deny it.
• Lovallo v. Froehlke
  468 F.2d 340· 2d Cir.· 1972-10-03 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the Army's order recalling the appellant to active duty was valid, despite the Army's delay and the appellant's mistaken belief that his enlistment had expired.
• Taylor v. State OF Minn.
  466 F.2d 1119· 8th Cir.· 1972-09-18 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the seizure and introduction of the memorandum did not violate the appellant's Fourth or Fifth Amendment rights, nor did the denial of a continuance violate his Sixth Amendment rights.
• United States ex rel. Harvey A. Marcelin v. Mancusi
  462 F.2d 36· 2d Cir.· 1972-05-22 ·cited 34×
  The dissenting judge would find that the petitioner was denied effective assistance of counsel due to counsel's failure to investigate and present a viable insanity defense.
• Rastrom v. Robbins
  440 F.2d 1251· 1st Cir.· 1971-04-14 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the petitioner was denied effective assistance of counsel due to a combination of factors including inexperienced counsel, limited preparation time, and the complexity of the case.
• Hoskins v. Wainwright
  440 F.2d 69· 5th Cir.· 1971-03-22 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the appellant made a prima facie case for denial of speedy trial, requiring the state to prove the delay was not prejudicial.
• Hamilton v. Watkins
  436 F.2d 1323· 5th Cir.· 1970-12-30 ·cited 34×
  The court held that undue delay in asserting a constitutional right does not constitute a waiver if there is no intentional relinquishment of a known right.
• United States ex rel. James Springle v. Follette
  435 F.2d 1380· 2d Cir.· 1970-12-22 ·cited 34×
  The court held that despite a suggestive station-house identification procedure, the totality of the circumstances did not create a substantial likelihood of irreparable misidentification, thus not violating due process.
• Westberry v. Major C. W. Keith
  434 F.2d 623· 5th Cir.· 1970-11-11 ·cited 34×
• Muniz v. Beto
  434 F.2d 697· 5th Cir.· 1970-11-05 ·cited 34×
  The majority opinion grants relief to Muniz based on discriminatory jury composition, but the dissenting judge disagrees with the retroactivity of this holding.
• Allen v. Rhay
  431 F.2d 1160· 9th Cir.· 1970-09-11 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the petitioner's claims regarding identification procedures and denial of counsel did not violate his due process rights, and his claims regarding appeal coercion were frivolous.
• Conner v. Wingo
  429 F.2d 630· 6th Cir.· 1970-06-05 ·cited 34×
  The dissenting judge would hold that the trial judge's awareness of the petitioner's mental state and behavior created a bona fide doubt regarding his competence to stand trial, necessitating a sua sponte inquiry.
• Hines v. Baker
  422 F.2d 1002· 10th Cir.· 1970-02-17 ·cited 34×
  The court affirmed the denial of habeas corpus relief, finding no constitutional infringement regarding the waiver of appeal, the constitutionality of the felony murder statute, or the denial of a transcript for exploratory purposes.
• Marchand v. Dir., U. S. Prob. Off.
  421 F.2d 331· 1st Cir.· 1970-01-13 ·cited 34×
• Jetson RAY v. State
  231 So. 2d 813· Fla.· 1969-12-10 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the petitioner's conviction under the second information was barred by double jeopardy, and the conviction under the first information, though attempted to be nolle prosequi, should be reinstated subject to a determination of the proper sentence.
• Smith v. Rhay
  419 F.2d 160· 9th Cir.· 1969-12-02 ·cited 34×
  The majority improperly made new factual findings instead of remanding for an evidentiary hearing, and erred in granting the writ.
• Harris v. Ciccone
  417 F.2d 479· 8th Cir.· 1969-10-24 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the petitioner was not denied constitutional rights during the pretrial investigation, post-trial review, or military trial, and therefore, his habeas corpus petition was properly denied.
• James v. Headley
  410 F.2d 325· 5th Cir.· 1969-04-09 ·cited 34×
  The Fifth Circuit holds that the right to court-appointed counsel, as articulated in Harvey v. Mississippi, applies to petty offenses and is alive and well in the circuit.
• Losieau v. Sigler
  406 F.2d 795· 8th Cir.· 1969-02-04 ·cited 34×
  A prior conviction obtained without counsel, or with an invalid sentence due to lack of counsel, cannot be used to enhance punishment under a habitual criminal statute.
• Thompson v. Wingate White
  406 F.2d 1176· 5th Cir.· 1969-01-28 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the state failed to establish probable cause for a warrantless search, even with additional evidence presented at the hearing.
• United States ex rel. Frank Chambers v. Maroney
  408 F.2d 1186· 3d Cir.· 1969-01-22 ·cited 34×
  The court held that while belated appointment of counsel creates a prima facie case of ineffectiveness, the record contained sufficient affirmative proof to rebut the presumption of prejudice, thus no evidentiary hearing was required.
• Stewart v. Bishop
  403 F.2d 674· 8th Cir.· 1968-11-21 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the petitioner's appeal should be reviewed on its merits, despite procedural irregularities, to avoid prejudice.
• United States ex rel. Louis McCLOUD v. Rundle
  402 F.2d 853· 3d Cir.· 1968-10-28 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the prosecution bears the burden of proving a guilty plea's voluntariness when a coerced confession may have influenced it.
• Hintz v. Beto
  379 F.2d 937· 5th Cir.· 1967-06-29 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the denial of the motion for continuance, which prevented defense counsel from adequately preparing a defense based on the defendant's mental condition, violated the Sixth Amendment right to effective assistance of counsel.
• Twiford v. Peyton
  372 F.2d 670· 4th Cir.· 1967-02-06 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the late appointment of counsel combined with the denial of a continuance to investigate a potential alibi witness constituted a denial of effective assistance of counsel.
• Kuhl v. United States
  370 F.2d 20· 9th Cir.· 1966-11-18 ·cited 34×
  A federal prisoner who, through counsel, intentionally bypasses orderly procedures for raising a Fourth Amendment search and seizure claim at trial or on direct appeal, waives that claim and cannot raise it in a subsequent Section 2255 motion.
• Dutton R. Miller v. Sigler
  353 F.2d 424· 8th Cir.· 1965-12-20 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the magistrate had a substantial basis to conclude probable cause existed for the search warrant based on the officer's observation of the odor of marijuana and additional information from an informant.
• Silva v. COX
  351 F.2d 61· 10th Cir.· 1965-09-21 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the appellant waived his right to a preliminary hearing and service of the information by knowingly and understandingly entering a guilty plea, and that his counsel was not ineffective.
• Jones v. Rivers
  338 F.2d 862· 4th Cir.· 1964-11-04 ·cited 34×
  A parolee is entitled to appointed counsel in a revocation hearing if they deny the alleged violation and are indigent, but not if the violation is admitted.
• Barker v. The State OF Ohio
  328 F.2d 582· 6th Cir.· 1964-03-09 ·cited 34×
  A habeas corpus proceeding cannot be used to raise a double jeopardy claim that was not raised at trial, and even if it could, the conviction for uttering a forged instrument after acquittal for forgery does not violate the Double Jeopardy Clause as they are distinct offenses.
• The People OF the State OF Cal. v. Hurst
  325 F.2d 891· 9th Cir.· 1963-12-19 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the search of the premises and the seizure of evidence were illegal, violating the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments, and that the Mapp v. Ohio decision should be applied retroactively in this habeas corpus proceeding.