Habeas Corpus

18,781 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count

• O'Dell Blackmon v. White
  825 F.2d 1263· 8th Cir.· 1987-08-07 ·cited 27×
  The court held that the petitioner's appellate counsel was not ineffective for failing to raise the issue of the trial court's failure to instruct the jury on manslaughter, as the Missouri appellate courts would not have found plain error under the circumstances.
• Brogdon v. Butler
  824 F.2d 338· 5th Cir.· 1987-07-29 ·cited 27×
  The court affirmed the per curiam opinion, but the concurring opinion expresses concern about the lengthy review process in capital cases and its impact on public perception of justice.
• United States ex rel. Joseph Kosik, Jr. v. Napoli
  814 F.2d 1151· 7th Cir.· 1987-02-26 ·cited 27×
  The court held that even if pretrial identification procedures were unduly suggestive, the subsequent trial identifications were sufficiently reliable under the totality of the circumstances to satisfy due process requirements.
• Owen v. Louie L. Wainwright
  806 F.2d 1519· 11th Cir.· 1986-12-31 ·cited 27×
  The court held that the appellants failed to allege sufficient facts to establish a constitutional violation, thus denying their entitlement to an evidentiary hearing in federal court.
• Barney Earl Crutchfield v. Louie L. Wainwright
  803 F.2d 1103· 11th Cir.· 1986-11-10 ·cited 27×
  Trial courts should not automatically reverse convictions when attorney-client communication is interfered with during brief recesses; defendants must demonstrate prejudice.
• Chaney v. Lewis
  801 F.2d 1191· 9th Cir.· 1986-10-09 ·cited 27×
  The court held that a district court must independently review the state court record for mixed questions of fact and law in habeas corpus petitions, but not for purely factual or purely legal questions. Counsel should be appointed in death penalty habeas cases on remand due to c
• Long v. O.L. McCOTTER
  792 F.2d 1338· 5th Cir.· 1986-06-27 ·cited 27×
  A prisoner's voluntary and knowing plea of 'true' to enhancement charges forecloses his subsequent attack on the validity of the prior conviction used for enhancement.
• Hanson v. Heckel
  791 F.2d 93· 7th Cir.· 1986-05-21 ·cited 27×
  A state prisoner's civil rights action challenging the deprivation of good time credits, which directly impacts the duration of confinement, must be brought as a habeas corpus petition requiring exhaustion of state remedies, even if seeking damages.
• Ross v. Kemp
  785 F.2d 1467· 11th Cir.· 1986-03-20 ·cited 27×
  The court held that the Murphy deposition should be added to the record on appeal, but the Cole deposition should not. The court remanded the issue of the 1984 affidavits to the district court to determine if the failure to present them earlier was inexcusable neglect.
• Love v. Young
  781 F.2d 1307· 7th Cir.· 1986-01-27 ·cited 27×
  The court held that the identification procedures were not unduly suggestive and that the admission of the defendant's statements to Detective Lombardo did not violate his Sixth Amendment right to counsel because he validly waived that right.
• Bowen v. Kemp
  769 F.2d 672· 11th Cir.· 1985-08-06 ·cited 27×
  The petitioner lacks standing to assert an Equal Protection claim based on the underrepresentation of women on the jury pool, as he is not a member of the underrepresented group.
• Austad v. Risley
  761 F.2d 1348· 9th Cir.· 1985-05-23 ·cited 27×
  A federal habeas court is not required to sua sponte obtain state court record exhibits if the petitioner has not produced them or demonstrated an inability to do so.
• Songer v. State
  463 So. 2d 229· Fla.· 1985-01-31 ·cited 27×
  The court held that the trial judge did not err in denying appellant's second motion to vacate judgment and sentence, as the grounds raised were previously addressed or not newly discovered.
• Son H. Fleming v. Kemp
  748 F.2d 1435· 11th Cir.· 1984-11-29 ·cited 27×
  The court held that the petitioner was deprived of his Sixth Amendment right to counsel at a critical stage of his murder prosecution, requiring automatic reversal of his conviction.
• Vanes v. United States Parole Comm'n
  741 F.2d 1197· 9th Cir.· 1984-08-31 ·cited 27×
  The court held that the Parole Commission's failure to provide pre-hearing notice of the DWI conviction as a parole violation charge rendered its use improper for revocation and forfeiture of street time.
• United States v. Diaz
  733 F.2d 371· 5th Cir.· 1984-06-01 ·cited 27×
  The court held that the appellant's guilty pleas were knowing and voluntary, and that his claims of ineffective assistance of counsel were without merit. One of the sentences was vacated under the concurrent sentence doctrine.
• Songer v. Louie L. Wainwright
  733 F.2d 788· 11th Cir.· 1984-05-18 ·cited 27×
  The court affirmed the district court's denial of habeas corpus relief, finding no constitutional error in the denial of ineffective assistance of counsel claims or due process violations in the penalty phase.
• Toney v. Franzen
  687 F.2d 1016· 7th Cir.· 1982-08-30 ·cited 27×
  A state prisoner has exhausted state remedies for federal habeas corpus purposes when the state courts have had a fair opportunity to address the federal constitutional issue, even if the state court's order was not fully adjudicative or if further state proceedings are technical
• Matias v. Masaru Oshiro and Tany S. Hong
  683 F.2d 318· 9th Cir.· 1982-08-03 ·cited 27×
  The court held that the district court erred in dismissing the ineffective assistance of counsel claim without determining if there was cause and prejudice for the procedural default.
• MacHetti v. Linahan
  679 F.2d 236· 11th Cir.· 1982-06-25 ·cited 27×
  The court held that Georgia's jury selection procedure, which allowed women to opt-out of service, resulted in unconstitutional underrepresentation of women on jury venires, violating the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendment fair cross-section requirement.
• Powell v. James Spalding & Slade Gorton
  679 F.2d 163· 9th Cir.· 1982-06-08 ·cited 27×
  The court held that a district court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to allow a habeas petitioner to amend his petition to include an unexhausted claim after the state had already responded.
• Harris v. Oliver
  645 F.2d 327· 5th Cir.· 1981-05-18 ·cited 27×
  The court held that the district court erred in denying the habeas corpus petition without an evidentiary hearing because the state court applied an incorrect legal standard for effective assistance of counsel, making factual findings unreliable.
• Bouchillon v. Estelle
  628 F.2d 926· 5th Cir.· 1980-10-24 ·cited 27×
  The court affirmed the denial of the habeas petition, finding that the petitioner failed to meet his burden of proof regarding lack of counsel and that other claims were barred by unreasonable delay and prejudice under Rule 9(a).
• Thomas v. Blackburn
  623 F.2d 383· 5th Cir.· 1980-08-07 ·cited 27×
  The court held that the Supreme Court's decision in Ballew v. Georgia, which declared five-member juries unconstitutional, should be applied retroactively to invalidate convictions obtained by such juries.
• Alvarez v. Louie L. Wainwright
  607 F.2d 683· 5th Cir.· 1979-11-28 ·cited 27×
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion for severance, and thus the defendant was not denied a fair trial.
• Jones v. Estelle
  584 F.2d 687· 5th Cir.· 1978-11-20 ·cited 27×
  The court held that a guilty plea is valid if the plea bargain was not breached and the plea was not coerced, and that Anders requirements do not apply when a client voluntarily withdraws an appeal after receiving effective advice.
• Favis Clay Martin v. Estelle
  583 F.2d 1373· 5th Cir.· 1978-11-16 ·cited 27×
  The court held that the district court erred by failing to first determine if a meaningful retrospective competency hearing was practicable and by improperly placing the burden of proof on the state.
• Badger v. Cardwell
  587 F.2d 968· 9th Cir.· 1978-10-26 ·cited 27×
  The court held that the defendant's second and third expulsions from the courtroom were erroneous and not harmless error, as his misconduct did not rise to the level that necessitated his removal to ensure a fair trial, especially when considering his right to self-representation
• Ostrer v. United States
  584 F.2d 594· 2d Cir.· 1978-09-21 ·cited 27×
  A district court lacks the power to grant bail to a habeas petitioner after the court of appeals has issued its mandate forthwith, as this constitutes an independent order respecting custody.
• Gibson v. Jackson
  578 F.2d 1045· 5th Cir.· 1978-08-23 ·cited 27×
  The court held that the federal district court should have abstained from deciding the case pending the outcome of the state habeas corpus proceedings.
• Scott v. Estelle
  567 F.2d 632· 5th Cir.· 1978-02-08 ·cited 27×
  The court held that the district court erred by not requiring a respondent to answer or holding an evidentiary hearing before denying habeas corpus relief.
• Jackson v. State OF Ala.
  530 F.2d 1231· 5th Cir.· 1976-04-30 ·cited 27×
  The dissenting judge argues that denying credit for pre-sentence and post-sentence detention to indigent defendants solely because of their inability to make bail constitutes unconstitutional discrimination based on wealth.
• Proffitt v. Ciccone
  506 F.2d 1020· 8th Cir.· 1974-11-15 ·cited 27×
  The court affirmed the district court's denial of relief, finding that while the prisoner's claims stated prima facie cases, the procedures followed were sufficient to avoid constitutional challenge.
• LaFRANCE v. Bohlinger
  499 F.2d 29· 1st Cir.· 1974-06-28 ·cited 27×
  A witness's prior statement used for impeachment, if claimed to be coerced, requires a judicial inquiry into its voluntariness, but the issue of voluntariness need not be submitted to the jury.
• United States ex rel. Charles F. Scott v. Mancusi
  429 F.2d 104· 2d Cir.· 1970-07-06 ·cited 27×
  A guilty plea induced by defense counsel's good-faith, but erroneous, sentence estimate or misstatement of law regarding withdrawal does not render the plea involuntary, absent evidence of government inducement.
• Baker v. Sard
  420 F.2d 1342· D.C. Cir.· 1969-10-15 ·cited 27×
  A request for release pending appeal from the dismissal of an action challenging parole revocation should be raised first in the District Court.
• MAY v. State OF Ga.
  409 F.2d 203· 5th Cir.· 1969-03-20 ·cited 27×
  A state has a constitutional duty to make a diligent, good-faith effort to bring a defendant incarcerated by another sovereign to trial when demanded.
• Dick Malone v. Crouse
  380 F.2d 741· 10th Cir.· 1967-07-14 ·cited 27×
  The court held that the appellant's arrest and the search of his suitcase were lawful, and that he was not denied due process or a fair trial by various alleged errors.
• Matera v. Buchanan
  192 So. 2d 18· Fla. 3d DCA· 1966-11-15 ·cited 27×
  Matera appeals a circuit court's denial of his habeas corpus petition challenging a $250,000 bail as excessive. The appellate court holds that under Florida's Constitution, the bail amount was indeed excessive and amounted to a denial of bail for a non-capital felony, reversing t
• Foxworth v. Wainwright
  167 So. 2d 868· Fla.· 1964-10-07 ·cited 27×
  The denial of an adjudication of insolvency, based on the perceived frivolousness of the appeal, can illegally preclude appellate review, but the petitioner's specific claims for relief from his original conviction are without merit.
• Baxter McLendon Ashley v. State
  158 So. 2d 530· Fla. 2d DCA· 1963-12-13 ·cited 27×
  The court held that a pro se prisoner's motion to vacate a sentence should not be summarily denied if it states a valid claim, even if unsworn, and that the record must affirmatively show a knowing and intelligent waiver of counsel.
• Fulwood v. Clemmer
  295 F.2d 171· D.C. Cir.· 1961-08-14 ·cited 27×
  The District Court erred in denying leave to file the petition, and the case should be remanded for further proceedings.
• Kelly v. The State of Fla. ex rel. Frank K. Leonard & R. R. Russell
  92 So. 2d 172· Fla.· 1956-10-10 ·cited 27×
  Four Dade County officials were charged with conspiracy to commit grand larceny after a garage was moved from Port Authority property. The circuit court discharged them on habeas corpus after examining a contract that showed the garage had become the property of the mover, not th
• Whelchel v. McDONALD
  176 F.2d 260· 5th Cir.· 1949-07-22 ·cited 27×
  The court held that the composition of the court-martial was lawful and that the reviewing authorities' actions regarding the appellant's alleged insanity were sufficient, precluding habeas corpus relief.
• Carmichael v. Delaney
  170 F.2d 239· 9th Cir.· 1948-10-18 ·cited 27×
  The court held that a resident of the United States claiming citizenship, even if facing exclusion proceedings, is entitled to a judicial trial, and that the appellee's return from wartime service did not constitute an 'entry' under immigration laws.
• Eagles v. United States ex rel. Horowitz
  329 U.S. 317· U.S.· 1946-12-23 ·cited 27×
  The Court held that the administrative procedure used to classify Horowitz did not vitiate his classification, and he failed to establish prejudice from any potential procedural irregularities.
• United States ex rel. Hull v. Stalter
  151 F.2d 633· 7th Cir.· 1945-11-06 ·cited 27×
  The court held that the Selective Service Board abused its discretion by refusing to classify the relator as a minister of religion, as subsequent proof conclusively demonstrated his entitlement to such classification.
• John D. Pennekamp & the Miami Herald Publ'g Co. v. The Cir. Court of the Eleventh Jud. Cir. in & for Dade Cnty.
  155 Fla. 589· Fla.· 1945-02-27 ·cited 27×
  Appeal is the proper method to review a contempt judgment where no detention is involved. Habeas corpus is not applicable in such cases.
• Johnston v. Wright
  137 F.2d 914· 9th Cir.· 1943-08-07 ·cited 27×
  The court held that the federal sentences had not yet commenced because the condition precedent of the expiration of the state sentences had not occurred, and thus Wright's detention by federal authorities was unlawful.
• State ex rel. N. Buckner v. Culbreath
  147 Fla. 560· Fla.· 1941-06-27 ·cited 27×
  The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the commitment of optometrists to county jail for contempt of court after they violated an injunction against practicing optometry. The court held that habeas corpus is not the proper remedy to challenge the underlying validity of an injunction;