Habeas Corpus

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

• McLEOD v. Peterson
  283 F.2d 180· 3d Cir.· 1960-10-06 ·cited 32×
  The court held that the appellant's departure under the circumstances did not interrupt his continuous physical presence for the purpose of the statute, and the prior erroneous denial of discretionary relief should be reviewed.
• Rushing v. Wilkinson
  272 F.2d 633· 5th Cir.· 1959-11-25 ·cited 32×
  The court held that the petitioner received adequate assistance of counsel and a fair trial, and that the military courts properly considered all claims.
• Smith v. United States
  270 F.2d 921· D.C. Cir.· 1959-07-07 ·cited 32×
  The court held that while the second motion was technically successive, the trial court abused its discretion in not entertaining it.
• State ex rel. David L. Wilson v. Culver
  110 So. 2d 674· Fla.· 1959-04-10 ·cited 32×
  The Florida Supreme Court upheld a conviction for escape from jail, rejecting the petitioner's challenge that he could not be lawfully convicted of escape while awaiting trial on a felony charge. The court held that escape is a substantive offense under Florida statute, independe
• Shaver v. Ellis
  255 F.2d 509· 5th Cir.· 1958-05-29 ·cited 32×
  A petition for habeas corpus cannot be used to challenge a conviction based on newly discovered evidence of innocence, as such claims go to the merits of the conviction, not its legality.
• Caryl Chessman v. Harley O. Teets
  239 F.2d 205· 9th Cir.· 1956-10-18 ·cited 32×
• United States ex rel. Oliver S. Smith v. Jackson
  234 F.2d 742· 2d Cir.· 1956-05-22 ·cited 32×
  The court held that a state court's gratuitous opinion on the merits, after denying jurisdiction, does not bar federal review. Denial of certiorari also counts as exhaustion of state remedies.
• Appeal of the United States Sec. & Exch. Comm'n
  226 F.2d 501· 6th Cir.· 1955-10-19 ·cited 32×
  The court held that the SEC General Counsel was properly held in contempt for refusing to produce privileged documents, as the court's need for information in a trial outweighed the agency's asserted privilege.
• Mills v. Hunter
  204 F.2d 468· 10th Cir.· 1953-04-28 ·cited 32×
  The court held that the Texas sentence was not void for vagueness and did not run concurrently with other sentences, thus petitioner had not fully served his time.
• Garcia v. Steele
  193 F.2d 276· 8th Cir.· 1951-12-27 ·cited 32×
  A federal prisoner's claim of sanity, challenging confinement in a medical center for federal prisoners, does not present a question for judicial review via habeas corpus. The Attorney General's determination of suitability for confinement is exclusive.
• Melanson v. O'Brien
  191 F.2d 963· 1st Cir.· 1951-10-26 ·cited 32×
  The court held that the petitioner was denied procedural due process under the Fourteenth Amendment by being forced to trial without adequate opportunity to secure counsel of his choice.
• Weber v. Steele
  185 F.2d 799· 8th Cir.· 1950-12-19 ·cited 32×
  A federal prisoner must first seek relief from the sentencing court under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 before filing a habeas corpus petition in another district.
• Mercado v. United States
  183 F.2d 486· 1st Cir.· 1950-07-13 ·cited 32×
  The appeal is timely because proceedings under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 are treated as civil for appeal purposes, and the court affirms the denial of the motion on the merits.
• Schechtman v. Foster
  172 F.2d 339· 2d Cir.· 1949-02-04 ·cited 32×
  The court held that a federal court will not ordinarily reexamine questions adjudicated by state courts, especially when the Supreme Court has denied certiorari, and that due process does not guarantee an infallible legal process.
• United States ex rel. Levy v. Cain
  149 F.2d 338· 2d Cir.· 1945-04-30 ·cited 32×
  The court held that the Selective Service Board's use of an anonymous advisory panel to recommend denial of a registrant's exemption, without disclosing the panel's identity or limiting questions to ecclesiastical matters, violated the registrant's statutory rights.
• Sanders v. Bennett
  148 F.2d 19· D.C. Cir.· 1945-03-05 ·cited 32×
  A court in the District of Columbia lacks jurisdiction to issue a writ of habeas corpus against the Attorney General for a federal prisoner confined outside the District.
• Eury v. Huff
  141 F.2d 554· 4th Cir.· 1944-03-31 ·cited 32×
  The court held that a valid waiver of the right to a twelve-person jury was made, and the sentence was not subject to collateral attack via habeas corpus.
• United States ex rel. Jacobs v. Barc
  141 F.2d 480· 6th Cir.· 1944-03-27 ·cited 32×
  The court held that the relator's federal sentence had not expired and the Parole Board retained jurisdiction to revoke his conditional release, even though the warrant was not served until after his release from state prison.
• United States ex rel. Phillips v. Downer
  135 F.2d 521· 2d Cir.· 1943-05-07 ·cited 32×
  The dissenting judge believes the draft board's factual findings, if based on substantial evidence and fair deliberation, should be upheld, even if the evidence is equivocal.
• In re Adoption of Carol Palmer
  129 Fla. 630· Fla.· 1937-10-22 ·cited 32×
  This case concerns whether an appeal can be taken from a circuit judge's order authorizing the adoption of a child. The court held that no appeal lies because the relevant statute does not provide for review, and the proceeding is statutory rather than a case originating in the C
• Williams v. The Honorable Nathan Mayo
  126 Fla. 871· Fla.· 1937-01-19 ·cited 32×
  Two armed robbery convicts challenged their convictions via habeas corpus, arguing the information omitted the word 'rob' and therefore failed to charge a crime. The Florida Supreme Court rejected this technical argument, holding that the information charged all essential element
• Ex Parte: Elvin E. Jeffcoat
  109 Fla. 207· Fla.· 1933-03-23 ·cited 32×
  Elvin Jeffcoat petitioned for habeas corpus relief on the eve of his execution for murder, arguing that the trial court record failed to affirmatively show his arraignment and plea, and that he had not been confined in the death chamber for the statutorily required five days. The
• Ex parte Tully
  70 Fla. 1· Fla.· 1914-09-23 ·cited 32×
  This case concerns a habeas corpus petition filed by individuals accused of rape, seeking bail. The court denied bail, finding that the evidence presented, despite conflicting testimony, was sufficient to establish that the "proof is evident or the presumption great" of a capital
• Cavazos v. Smith
  565 U.S. 1· U.S.· 2011-10-31 ·cited 31×
  The Supreme Court reversed the Ninth Circuit's decision granting habeas corpus relief to Shirley Ree Smith, who was convicted of assault on a child resulting in death based on expert testimony attributing a seven-week-old infant's death to shaken baby syndrome rather than sudden
• Evangelista Lopez v. State
  68 So. 3d 332· Fla. 5th DCA· 2011-08-12 ·cited 31×
  Lopez petitioned for relief claiming his appellate counsel was ineffective for failing to raise that the standard jury instruction for manslaughter by act constituted fundamental error. The court agreed and granted the petition, vacating his second-degree murder conviction and re
• Trotter v. State
  932 So. 2d 1045· Fla.· 2006-05-25 ·cited 31×
  Melvin Trotter appeals the denial of his post-conviction motion and a finding that he is not mentally retarded in a 1986 murder case where he was sentenced to death. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the circuit court's determinations and rejected Trotter's claims of ineffective
• Belgica Nubia Cruz v. State
  822 So. 2d 595· Fla. 3d DCA· 2002-08-16 ·cited 31×
  Bélgica Nubia Cruz petitioned for a writ of mandamus to quash a capias issued after she failed to appear in person at a pretrial conference, despite having filed a valid written waiver of appearance under Florida criminal procedure rules. The State confessed error, and the court
• Gourley v. State
  787 So. 2d 184· Fla. 5th DCA· 2001-05-11 ·cited 31×
  The court held that the appellant's postconviction motions were frivolous and meritless.
• Bennie Demps v. Dugger
  714 So. 2d 365· Fla.· 1998-04-09 ·cited 31×
  Bennie Demps, a death row inmate convicted of murdering a fellow inmate in 1976, challenged his death sentence through a third Rule 3.850 motion and habeas corpus petition. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the denial of postconviction relief and rejected all claims of error, fi
• Rivera v. Dugger
  629 So. 2d 105· Fla.· 1993-10-28 ·cited 31×
  Samuel Rivera, a death-row inmate convicted of murdering a police officer, appealed the denial of his postconviction relief motion. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed his murder conviction but vacated his death sentence and remanded for resentencing because the trial court improp
• Keane v. Cochran
  614 So. 2d 1186· Fla. 4th DCA· 1993-02-19 ·cited 31×
  The state failed to demonstrate good cause, based on new information or changed circumstances, to increase the petitioner's bond after it had already been set.
• In re Blodgett
  502 U.S. 236· U.S.· 1992-01-13 ·cited 31×
  The Court of Appeals' decision to defer ruling on a habeas petition to avoid piecemeal litigation and await a state supreme court decision was a proper exercise of discretion, not warranting mandamus.
• Creech v. A.J. Arave
  947 F.2d 873· 9th Cir.· 1991-03-27 ·cited 31×
  The panel erred in holding that Idaho's statutory aggravating factor of 'utter disregard for human life' is unconstitutionally vague, failing to give adequate deference to the Idaho Supreme Court's limiting construction.
• Walt v. Walt
  574 So. 2d 205· Fla. 1st DCA· 1991-01-23 ·cited 31×
  In this interstate child custody case, the Florida court reversed an order granting a writ of habeas corpus enforcing a Mississippi custody decree, holding that the Mississippi court failed to comply with the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction Act (UCCJA) jurisdictional requireme
• Russell v. Rolfs
  893 F.2d 1033· 9th Cir.· 1990-01-09 ·cited 31×
  The court held that the state is estopped from arguing procedural default because it previously represented to the federal court that an adequate and available state remedy existed, which contradicted its later argument that the petitioner was procedurally barred in state court.
• Ramsey v. Brennan
  878 F.2d 995· 7th Cir.· 1989-06-29 ·cited 31×
  Time spent in a halfway house before trial does not count as "custody" for sentence credit under 18 U.S.C. § 3568.
• Perry v. A.L. Lockhart
  871 F.2d 1384· 8th Cir.· 1989-04-10 ·cited 31×
  The court held that the state trial court's erroneous limitation on compulsory process did not warrant habeas relief as the absent witnesses' testimony was not material. It also held that the death sentence was not invalid under Collins v. Lockhart, as subsequent Supreme Court pr
• Williams v. A.L. Lockhart
  862 F.2d 155· 8th Cir.· 1988-11-17 ·cited 31×
  The court held that Rule 9(b) governing successive petitions is not germane when counsel files the first petition without petitioner's consultation.
• Cikora v. Dugger
  840 F.2d 893· 11th Cir.· 1988-03-25 ·cited 31×
  The court held that the standard of review for the district court's conclusion on identification procedure suggestiveness is 'clearly erroneous'.
• Waterhouse v. State
  522 So. 2d 341· Fla.· 1988-02-11 ·cited 31×
  Robert Brian Waterhouse was convicted of first-degree murder and sentenced to death. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed his conviction but vacated his death sentence due to the trial court's failure to instruct the jury to consider nonstatutory mitigating circumstances, violating
• Copeland v. Louie L. Wainwright
  505 So. 2d 425· Fla.· 1987-04-09 ·cited 31×
  Johnny Copeland, a death row inmate, sought habeas corpus relief and appealed the trial court's denial of his motion to vacate judgment and sentence. The Florida Supreme Court rejected all of Copeland's arguments, finding them either procedurally barred, previously decided, or la
• Cooper v. Louie L. Wainwright
  807 F.2d 881· 11th Cir.· 1986-12-19 ·cited 31×
  The court held that the doctrine of Wainwright v. Sykes and Murray v. Carrier does not bar review of the petitioner's claim that the trial court unconstitutionally excluded mitigating evidence.
• Marrow v. United States
  772 F.2d 525· 9th Cir.· 1985-09-24 ·cited 31×
  A district court may not summarily dismiss a habeas corpus petition alleging matters outside the record that, if true, could justify setting aside a guilty plea, without an evidentiary hearing.
• Thad D. Lowe v. Letsinger
  772 F.2d 308· 7th Cir.· 1985-08-29 ·cited 31×
  Judges are absolutely immune for judicial acts, including delays in ruling and decisions regarding notice. Clerks performing ministerial duties are not absolutely immune. The Attorney General is not liable without knowledge of the concealed judgment.
• Schwartzmiller v. Darrol Gardner
  752 F.2d 1341· 9th Cir.· 1984-12-20 ·cited 31×
  The court held that the statute was not unconstitutionally vague as applied to the defendant's conduct, but reversed the district court's finding of facial vagueness.
• Shaw v. Martin
  733 F.2d 304· 4th Cir.· 1984-04-26 ·cited 31×
  The court affirmed the denial of habeas corpus relief, finding no merit in claims of judicial bias, improper denial of an evidentiary hearing, or invalidity of the guilty plea.
• Owen v. Duckworth
  727 F.2d 643· 7th Cir.· 1984-02-08 ·cited 31×
  The court held that the district court's finding that the jury was not prejudiced by an external threat to a juror was clearly erroneous, violating the petitioner's constitutional right to an impartial jury.
• Martin v. Maggio
  711 F.2d 1273· 5th Cir.· 1983-08-15 ·cited 31×
  The court affirmed the denial of the habeas corpus petition, finding no constitutional error in the conviction or sentence.
• Mattes v. Gagnon
  700 F.2d 1096· 7th Cir.· 1983-02-16 ·cited 31×
  The court held that while the admission of prior testimony violated the Confrontation Clause, the error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt, and the jury instructions on intent did not impermissibly shift the burden of proof.
• Jones v. Cardwell
  686 F.2d 754· 9th Cir.· 1982-09-07 ·cited 31×
  The court held that a state court's consideration of a defendant's involuntary confession, obtained during a pre-sentence interview where the defendant was compelled to confess additional crimes, violates the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination.